RE: Why not free production? (Full Version)

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



Message

jaw -> RE: Why not free production? (5/20/2010 7:42:19 PM)

I'm sorry but I don't have the ability to do that screen shot thing; somebody else will have to contribute that.

BTW, don't forget that the game comes with an editor so if you think your hypothesis is correct you can test it by simply extending the pre'44 TOEs to the end of the War.



FM WarB -> RE: Why not free production? (5/21/2010 12:08:51 AM)

I never liked paper wargames with "Production Spirals" I avoid computer wargames with complex clickfest production models. Economics is called "the dismal science" for a reason.

What ids I'd prefer seeing are What if DAK hadnt been sent to Africa and Rommel had a Panzerkorps in Russia? What if there was no disaster in the west in 1944 and Wacht am Rhein was Wacht am Dnieper? Do we even know if the Germans dont suffer the historical disasters of 1941-44 that they cannot enjoy fighting late in this game?

As Robert Shaw as mythical German General in the flick "Battle of the Bulge" said, "Ze point iss not to Vinn, it iss to keep on fightingk"



Beetle -> RE: Why not free production? (5/21/2010 12:53:47 AM)

Mark Twain said it best..."There are lies, damn lies and statistics."  I have not found an economic statistic that I liked yet. [:D]



Steeltrap -> RE: Why not free production? (5/27/2010 7:27:47 AM)

The reasons I'd like to se it are:

1. IT WAS FUN. You had to balance shifting factories to different types and the loss of available resources that created in combat units aginast the improved performances of units as they got the newer models. Necessary? No. Fun? YES.

2. Adds more 'what if?' ability. What happens if you shift to a more advanced model earlier? Could that be 'gamey'? Sure. The modelling of the various vehicles' requirements in fuel etc SHOULD see you pay a price for building only Tigers and Panthers, plus you'd get fewer of them. Worth it? Who knows unless you try?

So, for fun and even greater replayability I think it would be better. The shifting of types of production, coupled with the need to move factories if USSR, made for some entertaining aspects of SF. For me it's a shame not to see it covered.

Will I buy the game? That will depend on reviews and the feedback I see here. Losing this aspect is a point against it, but by no means a reason in itself not to buy it.

Cheers



bshirt7 -> RE: Why not free production? (5/30/2010 1:16:01 AM)

Oh, the flavor of possibly producing more Tigers/Panthers/FW190/etc (even though shortcutting something else) is just overwhelming. As others have said, this game is historical up to turn #1. Trying to pretend that nothing could/would be changed in production despite endless different war results of game play is just silly.

But there is something alluring about the decision Matrix made. Trying to change the outcome of the East Front with what Germany historically built will be fun too. Count me in as a sold customer!




HMSWarspite -> RE: Why not free production? (6/1/2010 8:38:25 PM)

The biggest issue I have is that no one has ever done an economic model on a hard core wargame that is even close to comparable in detail and validity to the wargame combat side. This is possibly because it would be a game in itself, and possibly because no one can afford to relative to the increase in sales it would give over the basic game. Thus I stick to my original position - leave it out, rather than put it in and create space invaders...



Zovs -> RE: Why not free production? (6/1/2010 9:47:08 PM)

I would not say never. Back in 1974 SPI introduced the basic model in War in the East and they further refined it in War in Europe in 1976. Likewise DG then upgraded it so slightly in 1999 for the board war game market.

I know that AH has a very simple system in Third Reich (and Advanced Third Reich) but while the game system is simple I am sure designing it was complex.



Pford -> RE: Why not free production? (6/1/2010 11:20:09 PM)


quote:

Oh, the flavor of possibly producing more Tigers/Panthers/FW190/etc (even though short-cutting something else) is just overwhelming.


Haha, but we already know stuff the Germans didn't! You're introducing the treacherous hindsight factor. We all wish we bought Gold at the bottom in 2001. Or Apple stock in the 70s. The game's better without precognition.

On the other hand, one can argue that the Germs should have had merely produced upgrades of the solid MK4s rather than get started on the big cats with their over-engineered design, gas guzzling and protracted teething problems.



IronDuke_slith -> RE: Why not free production? (6/2/2010 1:11:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

The biggest issue I have is that no one has ever done an economic model on a hard core wargame that is even close to comparable in detail and validity to the wargame combat side. This is possibly because it would be a game in itself, and possibly because no one can afford to relative to the increase in sales it would give over the basic game. Thus I stick to my original position - leave it out, rather than put it in and create space invaders...


Completely agree, poartly because I can't be bothered typing out again what I did several pages back.

This problem can be tackled by scenario design. Is there a "Triumph in the west " variant where German production levels increase because Britain lost the Army at Dunkirk, sued for peace, didn't bomb or otherwise tie down German forces and the Wehrmacht gets to deploy fully in the east....?

You could also hypthesise extra fuel for the Wehrmacht as Britain trades with Germany to a limited degree, and less material for the Reds as lend lease never materialises.



pompack -> RE: Why not free production? (6/2/2010 1:30:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

The biggest issue I have is that no one has ever done an economic model on a hard core wargame that is even close to comparable in detail and validity to the wargame combat side. This is possibly because it would be a game in itself, and possibly because no one can afford to relative to the increase in sales it would give over the basic game. Thus I stick to my original position - leave it out, rather than put it in and create space invaders...



I remember back in the 70's (?, whenever) Dunnigan ran a reader poll in the old S&T about interest in that very subject. He pointed out that the effort to model a war economy would be considerably harder than simply modelling a war. The response was overwhelmingly negative; it was not the difficulty of playing such a monster in the paper and die days, it was simply that most of the readership wasn't that interested in the subject.




Numdydar -> RE: Why not free production? (6/2/2010 2:42:13 AM)

Actually Making History II is designed from the ground up as a full economic simulation of all of WWII not just Europe. You actually have to build several types of buildings in order to produce certain units, (engine factories for airplanes, etc.) So these types of games do exist.

However for something that only covers a single campaign (even one that took up so much of German production), free production would simply be forced into many different arbitrary rules to reflect other areas of the war that the player would have no control over. As someone said in another forum, 'if one side can benefit from historical hindsight, then all sides need to benefit as well.' The current constraints on the system of WitE, is much better as it eliminates the additional programing involved to build a seperate production system and forces the player to deal with the historical forces to achieve a differnt outcome. This will be the ture test of a player imho. Being able to build a dozen more panzer divisions (by either side) as an example, would totally skew the historical challenges. This is not the main goal of the game. There are many other games that you CAN do that. I applaud the designers for sticking to the historical model and definate think it is the right way to go.



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 7 8 [9]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.125