Historical Realism (Full Version)

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



Message

Shupov -> Historical Realism (7/27/2009 4:07:17 AM)

How well does WitE playtest compared to known historical battles? While WiR is my favorite game the play sometimes lacks historical realism. For example in WiR during 1941 and 1942 most Soviet cities can be reduced from high entrenchment level and captured in one to two weeks. Leningrad (and often Moscow) usually falls in 1941 and the battle of Stalingrad doesn't feel like the all-out battle in the ruins that took months of desperate fighting. Since WitE is a division-level game I hope there will be even more gritty realism than WiR.
There are many well-documented battles (e.g. Smolensk, Moscow, Kursk, Sevastopol and the destruction of Army Group Center in 1944) - are the playtesters recreating those OOB's and trying them out with the new game system? I would love to hear AAR's about those battles and invite suggestions from other Forum contributors.



Shupov -> RE: Historical Realism (7/28/2009 3:53:04 PM)

Playtesters - have you recreated any historical battles in WitE?  Can you show a screen shot to illustrate?



Hard Sarge -> RE: Historical Realism (7/28/2009 7:02:13 PM)

I think that question is a little over our rank to respond to



Joel Billings -> RE: Historical Realism (7/29/2009 12:33:42 AM)

So far the only scenarios we have to test are the campaign (and only the AI has gone past summer of 42), and the Typhoon scenario. I think we are feeling pretty good about how these are playing out now. We are working now on completing Case Blue and 1943 scenarios. The later mid war AI has been tested and adjusted using games that were run into 1942 by a human and then continued on AI vs AI. So as you can see we still have quite a bit of testing and adjusting to do. Of course the more the generic offense and defense AI's can handle in 1941-42, the easier it will be to get it to play reasonably well in later years. We would like to get these and other later war scenarios done soon so testers can give us feedback on those time periods.

As for capturing cities with forts, well, it can be done quickly if there are poor troops in the city and no reserves, otherwise it can be a pain. Backed by good units in reserve, I think you could bang your head against a fortified city (or any good defensive position) for a very long time.



Frank.Costanzo -> RE: Historical Realism (7/29/2009 2:40:09 AM)

Will Panzer Divisions be broken down into battalions? Such as Armored, Armored Infantry, Mot. Infantry etc..



Joel Billings -> RE: Historical Realism (7/29/2009 6:39:14 AM)

No, you can break German divisions down into regiments, but not lower. There are many battalions that are assigned to corps HQ to support the divisions. Although they aren't broken down, each unit lists every squad, gun and vehicle that is in the unit, and losses are taken in these items.



Shupov -> RE: Historical Realism (7/31/2009 7:25:49 PM)

Does artillery bombardment play a large role in WitE? The Soviets often employed their "God of War" especially from 1942 on to shatter defensive lines in advance of their offensives. Witness the hapless Romanians who were subjected to a massive barrage at the outset of the Stalingrad encirclement!

Along the same line, with a 10-mile hex grid can artillery units provide fire support to adjacent units, or is this part of the HQ function?

Are railroad guns included? The great Gustav 800 mm (31.5 inch) gun had a range of 23-29 miles depending on shell type. It was used effectively in the siege of Sevastopal, even though only 48 seven-ton shells were fired. If it is in WitE does it have a two-hex range?



PyleDriver -> RE: Historical Realism (7/31/2009 8:18:35 PM)

Yes, that aspect is being tested now, where artillery units (besides what is attached to divisions and armies) that don't move can attack 2 hexs, as though they were in range behind front line units. The Soviets have this ability as they created seperate units. German artillery is attached to divisions and corps...



PyleDriver -> RE: Historical Realism (7/31/2009 8:30:23 PM)

Not sure about the Gustav, I'll ask Joel about that one. The Germans do have the 2 Karl Batt (600mm) units which are 2 mortars each, 3 Heavy Howitzer Batt with 1 355mm and 9 305mm guns and the Theodor Batt with 6 240 mm guns...



knilli -> RE: Historical Realism (8/1/2009 12:32:32 PM)

Honestly, if I play the campaign I do want to start historically but I do not want to to follow history. I/We know about the mistakes made in WW2 (first was to start the war) but i do not want to be forced to split my forces to go for historical campaign targets. I do want to keep my tanks up at Leningrad and I do want to finish it off, or I might want to do one mighty blow against the center and walk in Napoleons footsteps and conquer Moscow. I do want to be able to retreat from Stalingrad and I do want to avoid loosing my units. Overall, it is a game and I am the one at the "trigger".
I am happy if the game features the loss of units because they where sent to other theaters (Italy, France) but other then that, no thank you.

I have some questions though. It was mentioned that units (Divisions) can be split into Regiments. Is this purely Player decision or does this follow historical Events. I can think of a few German Divisions which did not fight as a whole Division for most of the war in the east, because their Regiments (sub units) where used as "hole fillers" (for example the 3rd German Mountain Division fought for quite a time in - more or less - independent Kampfgruppen). 
Another question: Can independent Regiments/Battalions  be attached to Divisions? I think of - for example - an independent tank regiment/stug battalion. Can I attach them to another Pz Div or an Inf Div to strengthen them or is this not possible?

Again, I am happy to start historically and to have historical production, but everything else I would like to control.



Shupov -> RE: Historical Realism (8/1/2009 2:59:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: knilli

Honestly, if I play the campaign I do want to start historically but I do not want to to follow history. I/We know about the mistakes made in WW2 (first was to start the war) but i do not want to be forced to split my forces to go for historical campaign targets. I do want to keep my tanks up at Leningrad and I do want to finish it off, or I might want to do one mighty blow against the center and walk in Napoleons footsteps and conquer Moscow. I do want to be able to retreat from Stalingrad and I do want to avoid loosing my units. Overall, it is a game and I am the one at the "trigger".
...
Again, I am happy to start historically and to have historical production, but everything else I would like to control.



I agree with you knilli. My thought for this thread is that the game should play realistically but not force players to follow any course of action. As Soviet commander I want to withdraw my forces from the frontier in June 1941 and not fight futile counterattacks. But even if I do waste hundreds of thousands of lives counterattacking as the Soviets did I would still like the chance to win the war as they did!



PyleDriver -> RE: Historical Realism (8/1/2009 4:02:42 PM)

It starts historical, everything after that is up to the player, other than production and unit withdrawls...



Joel Billings -> RE: Historical Realism (8/1/2009 6:14:32 PM)

Breaking down to regiments is at player discretion. There are some weaknesses to being broken down. Certain kinds of support battalions can be attached directly to German divisions and Soviet Corps (at an admin cost).



knilli -> RE: Historical Realism (8/2/2009 4:25:18 AM)

@Joel: thx.
so I take it, that i can not attach any split regiment to other divisions (as said above for example a tank regiment to a Inf Div - like the german 78 Inf Div became 78 Sturm Div by getting a/some Stug battalions) or reinforce a tank brigade with an Inf Reg?



Iron Duke -> RE: Historical Realism (8/2/2009 11:53:56 AM)


Will there be enough free/spare slots in the database to breakdown every division into regiments (not somethink i'd do) but is there a limit to how many divisions can be broken down?

In previous GG games there has always seemed to be a shortage of free/spare slots in the databases , how large are the various databases ?

Artwork -- tanks and aircraft are they individual pieces/files or part of a larger palete?

WRT devices -- What is the lowest/smallest individual device represented in the game?




Joel Billings -> RE: Historical Realism (8/2/2009 11:49:24 PM)

You can break all German and Finnish divisions down if you want to, but you're unlikely to want to as there are some disadvantages to doing so. Can't answer the artwork question yet as various artwork for the items is being done now. Guns, bombs are devices. Units are made up of elements each being a squad, guns or vehicle.



Shupov -> RE: Historical Realism (8/3/2009 1:32:23 AM)

David Glantz's book says on 31 December 1943 the Red Army had 10 million soldiers assigned to 94 armies, 253 corps and 838 divisions (Colossus Reborn, p.588).  Many were in the Russian interior and Far East but how many units maximum will the Red Army have in WitE? 



Joel Billings -> RE: Historical Realism (8/3/2009 5:37:45 PM)

I don't know of any limit. There is an admin cost to building units (aside from those that are automatically mobilized, so there is a limit depending on what else you are spending your admin points on). Of course, having more units just spreads your limited manpower around. Seems that on the Eastern Front the Soviets had in the 6-7 million range on the front for most of 43-45.



harrybo -> RE: Historical Realism (8/28/2009 6:55:26 PM)

A couple of points I haven't seen mentioned in the WITE posts (if they have I'll get new glasses!)

1.  How is Soviet disorganisation represented in 41? - Like others I don't want a game that is simply a re-enactment, but I think that this aspect is historically really important in the early part of the campaign. I like that in WIR it's near impossible to combine Soviet counter-attacks in 41 and I'd like to see that extended to other moves/transfers etc. Sure, it should be possible for 'Stalin' to do things like withdraw troops rather than stand and fight, but make it difficult, maybe even on a random basis, so you can never be sure of the effect of your orders until Soviet command becomes better organised.
2. How is the Russian winter effect covered? - in WIR, the blizzard effect has way too big an impact on the Germans and I'd like to see it so that they don't get thrown back nearly to the start lines once the weather turns.



Helpless -> RE: Historical Realism (8/28/2009 7:05:15 PM)

quote:

1. How is Soviet disorganisation represented in 41? - Like others I don't want a game that is simply a re-enactment, but I think that this aspect is historically really important in the early part of the campaign. I like that in WIR it's near impossible to combine Soviet counter-attacks in 41 and I'd like to see that extended to other moves/transfers etc. Sure, it should be possible for 'Stalin' to do things like withdraw troops rather than stand and fight, but make it difficult, maybe even on a random basis, so you can never be sure of the effect of your orders until Soviet command becomes better organised.


Besides the historically bad setup, there plenty penalties for the Soviet player at the start of Barbarossa. Reduced movement points, low exp, low morale, etc. There are big surprise bonuses for the Germans during the first turn. Things like leaders initiative roll make many things quite random.

quote:

2. How is the Russian winter effect covered? - in WIR, the blizzard effect has way too big an impact on the Germans and I'd like to see it so that they don't get thrown back nearly to the start lines once the weather turns.


It's a subject of further test and tuning. There is some measures German player could take to soften first winter effect, ex. place units in the towns/cites (there is quite a few of them)




harrybo -> RE: Historical Realism (8/28/2009 9:46:18 PM)

Sounds good. I know you've got to be careful that random effects don't kill off the skill element. In the early days I think more use of that might be justified for the Soviets as the disorganisation wasn't just about reduced strength or lower movement ability, but just not knowing if orders got through, or if they did would they be acted on. Does the leader initiative affect all troops actions? Eg. in WIR, I think 'plotting' was affected, but marches and transfers weren't. I think it would add to the game if all were affected in some way.

More towns and cities to place troops in will help. A suggestion might be some sort of hybrid between 'Snow/Blizzard' and 'Rain' where you get a basic attrition effect even if you stand still (just not as bad as Blizzard is in WIR), but a heavy penalty if you try and move. This might make it less severe for Germans who 'dig in' even outside towns, but pretty disastrous for those that want to go places! This might replicate the theory that Hitler's 'stand or die' instruction in 41 arguably saved the Wehrmacht, as according to some it was the well-meant retreats ordered by the Generals that were really decimating the German troops.



Helpless -> RE: Historical Realism (8/28/2009 11:51:47 PM)

quote:

Does the leader initiative affect all troops actions?


Not all by quite many - movement, firepower, support units commitment, etc.



IronDuke_slith -> RE: Historical Realism (8/29/2009 12:14:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

You can break all German and Finnish divisions down if you want to, but you're unlikely to want to as there are some disadvantages to doing so. Can't answer the artwork question yet as various artwork for the items is being done now. Guns, bombs are devices. Units are made up of elements each being a squad, guns or vehicle.


Where you break an armoured Division down into its component Regiments, does it break down into an armoured Regiment and 2 PzGr Regs or three hybrid Regs like (say) TOAWIII would?

Regards,
IronDuke



Helpless -> RE: Historical Realism (8/29/2009 10:32:26 AM)

quote:

Where you break an armoured Division down into its component Regiments, does it break down into an armoured Regiment and 2 PzGr Regs or three hybrid Regs like (say) TOAWIII would?


Hybrid Regs.



IronDuke_slith -> RE: Historical Realism (8/29/2009 11:37:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Helpless

quote:

Where you break an armoured Division down into its component Regiments, does it break down into an armoured Regiment and 2 PzGr Regs or three hybrid Regs like (say) TOAWIII would?


Hybrid Regs.


A shame. I thought this was a weakness in TOAW since one of the reasons you might break down is to put the infantry into an urban area to defend and leave the Tanks in reserve since streets didn't agree with them.

Never mind.

Regards,
IronDuke



hank -> RE: Historical Realism (8/30/2009 12:07:21 AM)

I agree with IronDuke.  I wish TOAW allowed you to break Pz Divs into infantry regs and armored regs instead of the mixed arms units, but it doesn't.

Actually I think it would be best to have the option ... in some cases its best to keep them mixed ... in others its best to post your armor separate from your infantry (ID's example).  Give a player the option 

There are many cases where armor is not affective because of terrain ... with PzDiv hybrid units your forcing armor into hexes that may not be good and where infantry (PzGr's) are effective.  You may Have to occupy a hex with a PzDiv that's bad for armor.  Also, I would hope breaking a Div down in to Regs is not always a bad thing.  Why would it always be a bad thing or present a disadvantage to bread a Div down?



IronDuke_slith -> RE: Historical Realism (8/30/2009 9:31:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hank

I agree with IronDuke.  I wish TOAW allowed you to break Pz Divs into infantry regs and armored regs instead of the mixed arms units, but it doesn't.

Actually I think it would be best to have the option ... in some cases its best to keep them mixed ... in others its best to post your armor separate from your infantry (ID's example).  Give a player the option 

There are many cases where armor is not affective because of terrain ... with PzDiv hybrid units your forcing armor into hexes that may not be good and where infantry (PzGr's) are effective.  You may Have to occupy a hex with a PzDiv that's bad for armor.  Also, I would hope breaking a Div down in to Regs is not always a bad thing.  Why would it always be a bad thing or present a disadvantage to bread a Div down?


I'd hope the penalties weren't too severe. The German Army had so many detached Regiments floating around at times that it would be difficult to see this as a real minus for them.

When I did the scenarios for Panzer Command: Kharkov, the OOBs were a real headache since the defending German forces seem to be a series of Regiments drawn from all sorts of places.

Regards,
IronDuke



hank -> RE: Historical Realism (9/4/2009 1:55:16 PM)

Is there any hope an option would be added to break down a division into hybrid units or actual historical regiments?
The more I thought about this the more historically accurate it would be to allow a generalized breakdown into regiments.  For example, the 2nd Pz Div (1943) was composed of the 3rd Pz Reg, 2nd PzGr Reg, 304 PzGr Reg, 74th Pz Arty, 2nd Motorcycle, 5th Pz Recce, 38th TD, 38th Pz Eng, and the 38th Pz Signal battalion.

It would take some research and decisions on how to allocate resources between 4 basic units, 1 Armor, 2 PzGr, and one HQ or Support unit that would include the artillery, Signal and other support.  Or you could just split all the arty and support units between 3 units.  I'm sure this is a pipe dream and may be too much work and research into the historical aspects of each division.

Being an amateur military historian I play these games for education and enjoyment. If you could break a div down into regiments you can get close to drilling down to units where the great warriors of WWII fought ... like in Barbarossa, Kurt Knisple, gunner, 29th Pz Reg, 12 Pz Div. ... or who everyone knows Wittmann ... and live through their victories and defeats

Just a thought.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625