Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (Full Version)

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



Message

Rufus T. Firefly -> Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 6:38:30 PM)

Hi everyone,

I'm about to start a new GC and since I haven't played with random weather yet, I'm trying to decide it I should try it out. I recall reading in some previous post that a least a few people think the random weather option introduces too much randomness. I would hope that the random weather would provide an occasional surprise to spice up the game, but not go so far as to dramatically change the outcome of the game through an excessive amount of freak weather changes benifiting one side or the other.

So I'm interested in seeing what the majority opinion of the more experienced players will be. [&:]

Thanks for your advice!



Schmart -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 8:02:53 PM)

I play only with random weather. I think playing with non-random weather is far too predictable. Likes seriously, did the Germans and Russians know exactly when there would be mud and clear weather in the spring of 1942 (non-random weather alternates mud/clear from May to mid-June 42) to time their attacks? I don't think so.

Some people say it disadvantages the Axis too much with at least one mud turn in the summer of 1941. Don't forget though, that you'll also get at least one snow turn during the first winter, and that can put a major damper to any Russian blizzard offensive. Also, I once played a game (Russian v AI) where there was snow all through April 1942, allowing the Germans to conduct a spring counter-offensive for a full month longer. Let me tell you, that put a major dent in the Russian lines...



Tarhunnas -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 8:30:09 PM)

IMHO random weather will be somewhat more to the Germans advantage in 1941. As Schmart says, even thoug a mud turn in summer can put a wrench in the Geman machinery, a couple of snow turns during blizzard more than compensates. Later in teh game, I think random weather is an advantage to the Soviets, as they move second in the turn. Random weather makes the game much more unpredictable and enjoyable. However, I do agree with those that think random weather can be a bit too random. I would like to see some kind of light mud or similar during the summer months.



Farfarer61 -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 8:32:26 PM)

Random makes it more fun. Who stays in Russia during Blizzards anymore? :)



TulliusDetritus -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 9:11:50 PM)

Only random weather for me. In fact I am an extremist: death to non-random weather! [8D]



timmyab -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 10:09:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas
However, I do agree with those that think random weather can be a bit too random. I would like to see some kind of light mud or similar during the summer months.

Yes me too.Also a stage between snow and blizzard.
Ideally the weather would be completely random within historical possibilities, including the first winter.Some sort of VP compensation would be needed for the worst affected player.You'd probably need a next turn weather forecast as well.
The predictability of the weather, even when using the random weather option is a big negative for me.



Flaviusx -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 10:18:03 PM)

Tarhunnas, respectfully, I don't see how you can say random weather is in the German advantage in 1941. Mud turns in summer 1941 are like gold for the Soviets. I don't care how many snow turns turn up later. Surviving the summer is the most important thing.

Last game I played I had mud in south and central Soviet on turn 5, and in the north zone on turn 11. This was huge.








Tarhunnas -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 10:33:15 PM)

@Flaviusx Of course there is some luck to it, but with average luck there will only be one or two muds in summer, it evens out, you might get a shorter autumn mud period or a mild winter. I think I was lucky as the German with random weather in my game against gids.



Michael T -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/1/2012 11:02:32 PM)

Non Random only.

In my board games I like the weather tables and rolls. But the WITE version doesn't do it for me.



carlkay58 -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 12:19:21 AM)

I prefer and mostly play with Random weather. That said, it can truly bite either player in the rear at times. I did my first game of Barbarossa (as the Axis) with random weather (I did not realize it at the time) and had mud straight from the start of September until the end of October and then had snow and blizzard for the rest of it. It really put a stop on the Axis advance and I got totally creamed by the AI in the game!

On the other hand, I was one of the players who discovered the "Axis Spring" problem (where the Axis become supermen instantly in the first non-blizzard turn in 42) when my carefully planned final push of my Soviet winter offensive was totally ruined when I had a snow turn in February and had my three reserve armies that had just come up to the front totally crushed in two turns - over 1 million casualties while the Axis lost less than 25,000!

But I prefer not knowing when the weather will change and be forced to modify my plans accordingly.

I think that the random weather is great for the Soviets in the summer of 1941 - as anything that can slow down the Axis is a great thing. But after that, I think it tilts towards the Axis player. The Axis player is the first player under the turn's weather so it gives them a slight edge on taking advantage of it.



delatbabel -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 2:27:22 AM)

I prefer only to play with random weather but most of the server game challenges are set for non-random weather.

In fact in a game of this type I can't understand why non-random weather exists. It means that at the start of the game you know what the weather in every turn in April 1944 is going to be. That doesn't make sense.



kg_1007 -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 3:49:23 AM)

I like random just because I think knowing exactly when the blizzard will hit, when the mud will hit, etc, is a bit too much. The first game I played, I did use the "non random" because the scale of the game, etc, was so huge, the last thing I wanted to do was also keep track of possible weather issues while I learned it..but now, I prefer random always.



76mm -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 5:52:30 AM)

In theory I would like to play with random weather, but currently it is just too random. If they can't introduce something between clear and mud, I would like for them to introduce a "random-lite" option in which mud/blizzard can vary by +/- two or three turns, just to keep things interesting...



IdahoNYer -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 7:03:26 AM)

Random all the way. Nothing better to see mud stop an advance cold - whether in 41 or 44-45!



Tarhunnas -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 7:14:05 AM)

I think the preference for random or not depends on if you see WITE primarily as a game to be won or a simulation to be enjoyed.

The impact of weather is different for Axis and Soviet, as the Axis always moves first. I have found that late war, random weather can disadvantage the Axis in that you usually can break pockets and get encircled units out, but if a sudden spell of mud hits, suddenly your encircled units are goners. And late war, you usually have a couple of divisions encircled almost every turn.



cpt flam -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 7:38:42 AM)

Random too for me.
A bit more fun (except for summer 41 german). [:D]



janh -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 11:02:13 AM)

Random only. No one ever planned 3 months ahead because they new on week XX mud was coming. The non-random game is a totally different thing, and it is pure fiction.
A few more grades of weather would be nice though (light mud, heavy mud, etc.).



Commanderski -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 1:36:20 PM)

Random weather only for me. It's more fun and just like real weather, unpredictable. Has no advantage to either side.



heliodorus04 -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 8:45:06 PM)

Random. It can definitely do more good for the German than harm.
Plus, it's one of the only things that gives the game better replayability.

Obviously the weather zones could be improved a LOT, and as 76mm said, something in between full-on Rasputitsa and full-on dry would be very welcome in this game.



hfarrish -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 8:54:31 PM)

Back a year ago random was a death sentence for a German attacker; now I think the game would be almost impossible for the Soviet without it (and it helps to mitigate the blizzard somewhat on the other end)...I'd also note it can hurt the Soviet in '41 as well, particularly in terms of breaking pockets.

So yes, I think random and I agree with prior comments that gradations of weather impact would be nice in the future, so you would likely have more "rain" turns in the summer but many of these wouldn't completely shut down the offensive.



Manstein63 -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/2/2012 10:38:51 PM)

I also prefer to play Random weather as I think that the uncertaincy makes the game more fun. Saying that I also think that there should be more weather types so as you don't have clear on one turn then mud the next & then back to clear the turn following. I also think that smaller weather zones would be helpful perhaps dividing the existing zones by 3 so as you have a north center & south weather subzone maybe it will feature in WitE 2.0
Manstein63



Rufus T. Firefly -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/3/2012 3:24:51 AM)

The forces of Randomness have dealt a severe blow to the forces of order and predictabilty who were routed after the forces of Randomness achieved an 8:1 superiority (16 votes to 2).

Fortunately, the forces of predictabilty appeared in full divisional strength with 2 command points. Had they appeared with only a single brigade, rather than routing with heavy casualties they would have retreated 10 miles and I would have to run the same poll tomorrow![:D].

It looks like I'm going with random weather. Thanks for giving your opinions! I'll also make a post in in the suggetions thread about providing intermediate forms of weather, as that seems to be a popular (and very good) idea here, just in case the mods aren't paying attention.

Firefly



Shupov -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/3/2012 1:08:26 PM)

Are you playing against the AI or human opponents? Random gives the Axis the advantage of knowing what the Soviet player's weather will be, but not the other way around. IMO this is a considerable advantage.



timmyab -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/3/2012 2:55:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shupov

Are you playing against the AI or human opponents? Random gives the Axis the advantage of knowing what the Soviet player's weather will be, but not the other way around. IMO this is a considerable advantage.

This is why I think there should be a next turn 'weather forecast' when using random weather.An uncannily accurate one.



invernomuto -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/7/2012 8:23:19 AM)


quote:

So I'm interested in seeing what the majority opinion of the more experienced players will be.


Generally I like to play with historical weather.



juret -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/7/2012 9:34:24 AM)

non random only.



jaw -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/7/2012 1:11:38 PM)

This is one area where I disagree with just about everyone else on the development team: at a scale of one week turns and 10 mile hexes random weather is neither historicaliy nor meteorologically accurate. The amount of rain you need to produce mud conditions over hundreds of square miles of terrain cannot be produced by any fast moving summer shower. It requires sustained rain, day in and day out for days on end. At minimum, the probability of mud between July and September should be ZERO at this scale. Once the weather does deteriorate it should be very difficult, if not impossible, for it to improve before the season changes. So in the Fall, Clear can turn to Mud but Mud can't turn back to Clear, Mud can turn to Snow and Snow to Mud (if still in the Fall) but Blizzard can only be more Blizzard or Snow.

If the Random weather table had this structured variability I'd be all for it; as currently designed I'll stick with non-random weather.



hfarrish -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/7/2012 2:11:58 PM)


As one who uses random weather I don't disagree with any of the above; that said I think its almost an essential balancing mechanism for 41 at this point (especially for the summer but also for the blizzard). As others have noted it is a substitute slowing mechanism for a true logistics model.



glvaca -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/7/2012 2:33:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

This is one area where I disagree with just about everyone else on the development team: at a scale of one week turns and 10 mile hexes random weather is neither historicaliy nor meteorologically accurate. The amount of rain you need to produce mud conditions over hundreds of square miles of terrain cannot be produced by any fast moving summer shower. It requires sustained rain, day in and day out for days on end. At minimum, the probability of mud between July and September should be ZERO at this scale. Once the weather does deteriorate it should be very difficult, if not impossible, for it to improve before the season changes. So in the Fall, Clear can turn to Mud but Mud can't turn back to Clear, Mud can turn to Snow and Snow to Mud (if still in the Fall) but Blizzard can only be more Blizzard or Snow.

If the Random weather table had this structured variability I'd be all for it; as currently designed I'll stick with non-random weather.


amen!



danlongman -> RE: Informal Poll: Random Weather or Not (6/7/2012 3:30:15 PM)

I worked around weather and forecasting in aviation for the last 30 years or so. The idea of weather forcasting beyond a few days is ludicrous as far as specific
conditions are concerned. Some gross overall trends in the macro scale might be anticipated but given 1940's technology only a couple of days worth could be
predicted with any accuracy. Those damn butterflies would sabotage any long range prediction. In an overall sense the Germans were "upstream" of Russia
and could monitor weather across the atlantic and europe since things tend to flow from west to east in the northern hemisphere but not always. The famous
D-Day forcast was for the next morning and it could have been wrong. Weather is so capricious the idea of having weeks notice of the changes is like giving
the players a weather necromancer or a division of Panzer Dragons and comissars with magic swords. The old adage is climate is what you expect weather is what you get.
I think Twain or somebody said that. These last two weeks in Alberta in the year 2012 with satellite observation and a world wide forecast network undreamed of
in 1941 the daily forecasts have been wrong as often as right on a daily basis. If you want weather in a game the only way to put it in simply is to look at the climate trend
assign values and roll the dice. Warm and maybe rainy in summer, cold and maybe snowy in winter....spring and fall as before but with mud especially with autumn rains
and spring break up. The year 1941 could have had a long, hot dry summer, a late fall and a dry mild winter it happens some years. Other years summer is rainy and cool
winter comes early and she is a bitch.
cheers



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375