RE: The core problem with WitE+ (Full Version)

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



Message

topeverest -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/19/2014 4:45:45 PM)

Don't misunderstand my comments, I find this game very enjoyable and well designed. I recommend buying and playing it.



hfarrish -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/19/2014 4:56:24 PM)


Of course - I was referring to the recent post saying that he wouldn't buy the game after seeing the critiques listed here...



76mm -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/19/2014 6:07:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000
Despite its flaws, WITE is a pretty unique game. It's not really skippable because there isn't any other contemporary operational-level Eastern Front wargame out there.


Sure it's unique, but for me it is eminently skippable; I have very little time for playing any wargames, and if I have to pick one, it wouldn't be WitE--if I have to switch to one of the many tactical or campaign level games (PzC) out there, then that's OK.

And I don't think I'll pick up WitE 2.0 unless there are fairly massive changes.



SigUp -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/19/2014 6:45:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Sure it's unique, but for me it is eminently skippable

Every game is skippable. It's just that if one wants to play an operational-level East Front war game that encompasses the entire periode from 1941 to 1945 it's hard to pass up WITE.



Michael T -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/19/2014 9:24:00 PM)

Schwerpunkts WWII in Europe is on my radar, very much so.



Gizuria -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 1:27:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tombo

wow...just seeing this thread.
I have WitE but never really got started. It takes allot of time. I guess from above, i should skip it. Sad.[:(]


Play the scenarios! Buy the scenario packs. I doubt that I will ever play a full campaign but the scenarios are really fantastic. Plus, the VP scoring system is much better.



76mm -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 1:58:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp
It's just that if one wants to play an operational-level East Front war game that encompasses the entire periode from 1941 to 1945 it's hard to pass up WITE.


Sure, you're right about that.

And not to quibble, but why do people consider WitE an operational-level game? Despite its divisional scale, given its scope and the decisions allowed to players, I've always considered it to be a "strategic" game (but not "grand strategic")?



Gizuria -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 2:12:26 AM)

quote:

And not to quibble, but why do people consider WitE an operational-level game? Despite its divisional scale, given its scope and the decisions allowed to players, I've always considered it to be a "strategic" game (but not "grand strategic")?

Probably, and I'm guessing here, because of the scale of the hexes. That seems to me to be a fair scale for Operational wargames. But I agree with you, I feel that this is a strategic level game because of the size of the units.



gradenko2k -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 3:12:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
Sure, you're right about that.

And not to quibble, but why do people consider WitE an operational-level game? Despite its divisional scale, given its scope and the decisions allowed to players, I've always considered it to be a "strategic" game (but not "grand strategic")?

The size of the map hexes and smallest level of forces makes you carry out activities on an operational scale. It would be a strategic/grand strategic-level game if you controlled Corps or Army-sized units (think No Retreat!)



Tom Hunter -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 3:14:36 AM)

Tombo

I'm a critic, and you can see a lot of discussion of game the design on my AAR. I will not be launching a 1941-45 campaign game again. I think its possible that the game works for the scenarios, and I may try some of them. If you already have the game that is what I would recommend.

There is a level of detail in the game that many enjoy, and it can be a lot of fun. I like to understand the design in depth and the actual war. For me there are too many problems with the design, and it strays too far from the actual war. For others its still a lot of fun.



swkuh -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 3:34:14 PM)

Always appreciate forum comments about game design as they instruct my play and increase the fun.

To understand the "core problem" you have to consider what players want and cater those needs.

Agree completely that the shorter scenarios are vital and interesting to enjoy the game. +1 to the development team.

My broadest desire is that the Axis & Soviet forces should "feel" like "my" perception of Eastern front warfare throughout WWII. Given that desiderata, it doesn't matter much (to me) that various pools, casualties, units, TOEs, etc. become unhistorical. Its about combat outcomes, force mobility, terrain, etc. It was never a "balanced" conflict, Axis superior early, Soviets unstoppable later.

It might be possible, but I think trying to achieve this "feel" through detail data is a vanity. What a surprise to learn about the 1:1/2:1 rule (and possibly others) that had to be coded to fake late '41 results. Resolving combat through "shot by shot" reporting? Not for me. Interim & final CV's? Why bother. The way I play the game most outcomes seem right, so some of the fantastic detail is just eye candy. BTW, I appreciate the "eye candy."

What might be useful is more macro force management. The Commander's Report does help, but more like it would be useful.

In short, I don't see a "core problem."





RBednar -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 10:10:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp

What I would like to see is a completely new system for reserves. The current system offers quite ridiculous results. Against the AI I have seen infantry units sprint over 50 miles across two rivers to engage into a battle and then sprint back those 50 miles. All of this across the frontline (though they weren't ZOCed). Especially this jump in and jump out strikes me as particularly strange. So what I would prefer would be a twofold split into tactical and strategic reserves. Tactical reserves have to be within two hexes for infantry and four hexes for motorized units to have a chance to committ directly into a battle. Strategic reserves meanwhile function differently. They have the chance to activate if a breakthrough in a designated part of the front occurs and react by moving closer to that breakthrough spot, putting formerly empty areas under guard. That would help in reducing perfect planning for post-breakthrough moves.


With Russian HQ capability in 1941, the reserves will probably not be deployed. If so, the German Army will have a very tough fight on its hands. Why not just make a turn 3 1/2 days (half-a-week)? This gets the player to be part of the strategic reserve system!



RBednar -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 10:20:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tombo

wow...just seeing this thread.
I have WitE but never really got started. It takes allot of time. I guess from above, i should skip it. Sad.[:(]



There are so many comments in the post because so many players have played it repeatedly. There may be some burnout in the group, but the game is well worth buying and playing. Game balance can be adjusted using morale, etc. modifications. I guess no one likes prolonged World War I style warfare. This seems exactly what you get in the Operational Art of Warfare simulations of the Eastern Front, yet it is very interesting because the lines are never static. They just move slowly with very small encirclements (with some exceptions either way, of course). WITE held the promise of campaigns of encirclements, just like the real war.



RBednar -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/20/2014 10:29:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rrbill

Always appreciate forum comments about game design as they instruct my play and increase the fun.

To understand the "core problem" you have to consider what players want and cater those needs.

Agree completely that the shorter scenarios are vital and interesting to enjoy the game. +1 to the development team.

My broadest desire is that the Axis & Soviet forces should "feel" like "my" perception of Eastern front warfare throughout WWII. Given that desiderata, it doesn't matter much (to me) that various pools, casualties, units, TOEs, etc. become unhistorical. Its about combat outcomes, force mobility, terrain, etc. It was never a "balanced" conflict, Axis superior early, Soviets unstoppable later.

It might be possible, but I think trying to achieve this "feel" through detail data is a vanity. What a surprise to learn about the 1:1/2:1 rule (and possibly others) that had to be coded to fake late '41 results. Resolving combat through "shot by shot" reporting? Not for me. Interim & final CV's? Why bother. The way I play the game most outcomes seem right, so some of the fantastic detail is just eye candy. BTW, I appreciate the "eye candy."

What might be useful is more macro force management. The Commander's Report does help, but more like it would be useful.

In short, I don't see a "core problem."





If the actual nations would have had good, accurate wargames, the campaign would have never occurred! The fact that they didn't shows how really hard it is to do the design. The Allies had much better wargames for the Pacific operations. Both players have way too much information available about the other side's forces and reserves, and way too much super-command/coordination of their forces. In general this favors the one with more units, which will be the Russian side. Also, when the stronger side becomes very strong, a continuous disaster becomes unavoidable.



swkuh -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/21/2014 3:16:20 PM)

"Both players have way too much information available about the other side's forces and reserves, and way too much super-command/coordination of their forces."

Agree.

To some extant the command & control issue can be addressed through the 5 balance factors, players to their own pleasure. But the information available, even with FOW option on, seems too much.



GamesaurusRex -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/22/2014 10:55:15 PM)

For the question of the missing rivers... even simple map like this one show them.

http://stayinkiev.com/uploaded/mapukraine.jpg



Q-Ball -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/23/2014 8:03:57 PM)

I played WITE alot when it came out, then walked away for a year. I just read the last few pages of this little thread, and I am wondering now if I should walk away again, or sit out until a patch.

WITP-AE took several years, and 2 new releases, to get a point that is stable, playable, and basically a well balanced game with few flaws. It took over 6 years to get to that point with the engine. Is that what we are looking at here?





Peltonx -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/23/2014 8:08:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I played WITE alot when it came out, then walked away for a year. I just read the last few pages of this little thread, and I am wondering now if I should walk away again, or sit out until a patch.

WITP-AE took several years, and 2 new releases, to get a point that is stable, playable, and basically a well balanced game with few flaws. It took over 6 years to get to that point with the engine. Is that what we are looking at here?





WitE 2 will be good.



Saper2229 -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 7:31:13 AM)

I think, that if be rule 1:1=2:1 - easy win to Soviet in 1943 year. Soviet can stand and Germany cannot did easy pockets - Soviet easy re-move his industry. Many succesaful attack - many Guard division (20-30) to 12/41, no pockets and full industry - 6,5-7,0 mln to blizzard offensive, Germany lost many tank (repair damage not good in game (Germany have nice repair in war) and add lost in battles) in 1942 Germany if have not 3000-3500 tank - cannot move forvard (fort level 2-3 easy build by Soviet). Airforces cannot help Germany - in 1941 not supply in airbase to do heavy losse for Soviet - after 1942 Soviet have very, very many aircraft.
I think, that old rules (2:1 to win and first blizzard) can play more fun.



Tarhunnas -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 11:06:11 AM)

It is certainly true that many Soviet attacks in 1941 are made not for the attack itself but for "Guards farming".

I am pretty certain the Soviet generals in 1941 did not think "Hmm, i see a weak German/Rumanian unit there, lets attack it with as many divisions as possible so all of them get a better chance at becoming Guards units in a couple of months." As a matter of fact, i suspect they thought more along the lines of "Lets counterattack and drive the invaders back" or even "I know this counteratack is doomed, but if I don't execute it I am doomed...".

So an idea: Why not simply say that victories counting for Guards conversions start accumulating on say 1st november or something? That would at least eliminate Guards farming as a motive for attacks.



Peltonx -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 3:55:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

It is certainly true that many Soviet attacks in 1941 are made not for the attack itself but for "Guards farming".

I am pretty certain the Soviet generals in 1941 did not think "Hmm, i see a weak German/Rumanian unit there, lets attack it with as many divisions as possible so all of them get a better chance at becoming Guards units in a couple of months." As a matter of fact, i suspect they thought more along the lines of "Lets counterattack and drive the invaders back" or even "I know this counteratack is doomed, but if I don't execute it I am doomed...".

So an idea: Why not simply say that victories counting for Guards conversions start accumulating on say 1st november or something? That would at least eliminate Guards farming as a motive for attacks.


The problem in 1941 is the 1v1=2v1 no one really cares about guards.

If you read Sapper vs Pelton Sapper wins nearly 100% of the time because of rule.

Flaviusx took the time and knows how it is done.

Currently because of MP nerfs coupled with 1v1=2v1 its simply impossible to get anyways as GHC and SHC can start driving down GHC OOB in JULY 1941-yes july 1941.

The guard bug of which you probably know nothing was fixed a few patches ago, so guards are really not the problem.

The game will have to be rebalanced starting fresh is the sad truth.



Peltonx -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 4:04:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: smokindave34

I notified Callistrid that I am going to resign from our game. This is the third game in a row (Sapper, M60, Callistrid) where I have been handled decisively in '41 by solid Soviet opponents and I see no reason to go forward. I decided to stand and fight and have 7 divisions surrounded two turns into the blizzard. I used to be able to handle the axis well enough to produce a competitive game even against very good players (The Pro's) but no longer. This game is extremely challenging to play as axis right now against solid opponents (as other axis players better than I have noted) and I no longer seem to be able to make it into '43 with any real chance of standing up to the Soviets. Excellent game by you Callistrid - sorry to end it on you so quickly! I'll have to hang up my Field Marshall's baton for a while.....


This is the problem and BOTH sides see it not just one.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Callistrid

This game is over, and Dave was a very good opponent. Fighting on the Germans side is tough. It's enough to make a little mistake, and the war is lost. Let's see what I learn with the Soviet

1. Playing with the Soviet is easy. The sapper an construction brigades build fortification easily, and if you retreat on the first six turns, the saved troops with the reinforcements can hardly hit the advancing German troops. With the new rule the German can't pocket troops, because the encirclement can be broke easily.

2. Mild winter. Strong Soviet defeat the German, weak not. So the successful winter operation depend on how powerful is the Soviet army, not what my opponent did. On my game against Dave there infantry stack in level 2 fortification was easy to beat.

3. Paratroops. I never drop them, but using them could DE devastating. Easy method to break the supply line, or to isolate troops.





quote:

ORIGINAL: Callistrid

4. The Soviet have more rail yard then it should to have. With 100k+ it's easy to transport full fronts to threatened sectors. Using your short transport lines, the German will always face with strong troops in the critical sectors. And the factory evacuation is too fast. In the first seven turn, all what is unorganised sent to the urals.

5. Retreat, retreat, retreat. There is no reason to stand and fight on the first seven turn. Only around Leningrad, but that could be managed. The German could move close to Moscow, but never capture.

6. nonrandom weather. The nonrandom weather is not just a German favors. Because always the Soviet moves second, it's easy to be brave without consequences. You know when will be mud, and when could rest the troops, move forward to refit, or launch attack, when normally never do, because you don't know what will be the next weather.


And the most important. The 2/1 rule. It wag ugly when I start beating the German army around turn 14. The clear terrain gains no bonus defenses, and 6~9 cv into can be hit, without fear. And what is real worse, when you start attacking the front, launch 10+ successful attack.



The player base sees it-everyone.




morvael -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 4:18:06 PM)

Personally, I enjoy the game more knowing that support units attached to combat units won't draw excessive supplies while at the same time failing every single leader roll. I enjoy the game more knowing that support units attached to HQ units won't be resupplied out of thin air. I'm happy that Germans won't run 2 hexes per winter turn all along the front. I'm happy that HVAP and HEAT ammo will work, killing hundreds of Soviet tanks more. I'm extremely happy to know that support units will use proper amount of trucks, whether they are assigned to combat units or HQs (where previously they used 10x as much with combat units and 0x with HQs). I know balance may have been thrown out of the window by these fixes, but balance built on bugs is not something I would really call a balance. How can you balance the game, if you operate under false assumptions that something works as described in the manual while in fact it is not? I understand the position of some of you, but this game gives me a lot of fun since my PBEM started in September 2012 on 1.06-something and it continues to be so to this day. Still, some core ideas of the game cannot be altered before WitE 2.0 and that's something I accept, because since WitE 1.0 those things worked so, and since this was the game that I bought, it would be strange if suddenly I couldn't bear with it's quirks (design decisions) anymore.



Aurelian -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 7:55:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

It is certainly true that many Soviet attacks in 1941 are made not for the attack itself but for "Guards farming".

I am pretty certain the Soviet generals in 1941 did not think "Hmm, i see a weak German/Rumanian unit there, lets attack it with as many divisions as possible so all of them get a better chance at becoming Guards units in a couple of months." As a matter of fact, i suspect they thought more along the lines of "Lets counterattack and drive the invaders back" or even "I know this counteratack is doomed, but if I don't execute it I am doomed...".

So an idea: Why not simply say that victories counting for Guards conversions start accumulating on say 1st november or something? That would at least eliminate Guards farming as a motive for attacks.


Keep the current victory counting, but no Guards divisions until Sep 18th 1941, when Order #308 came into being to award distinguished service for the Yelnya offensive. (part of the Smolensk battles.)



chuckfourth -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/24/2014 8:00:21 PM)

Hi Morvael
This is great work, thanks.
I am more than willing to wait until WitE2.0 for its implementation, But a more sophisticated combat algorithm would be a great improvement.
You said earlier the combat results are plausible, that may be true, but the ratios of various types of equipment's casualties from combat must be very distorted exactly because the combat 'engine' is too simple.
That is a bit advantage to the Soviets.
for a more detailed explanation of this point see,

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3428981

Best Regards Chuck.



mmarquo -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/25/2014 12:03:51 PM)

I couldn't agree with you more, Moravel. The 1:1 --> 2:1 "doctrine" has been around since the game's inception, and some Soviet players have been attacking relentlessly since day 1. It was more of a killer in terms of morale accumulation in the days prior to the newest patch.

There is no Soviet, "I win button." I if you play with Sudden Death variant then the game gets very tense. I am currently Axis against Hffarish, and he is playing a forward defense with multiple attacks against me. In fact the lines just about settled at historic by winter but Leningrad fell. His blizzard offensive knocked me back a bit, but now in 1942 his morale has fallen - I survived the blizzard - and his units are very brittle. I may not be good enough to win, but feel good about at least a draw.

IMHO this game remains very fun and winnable by both sides, and the silent majority is still having a very good time with it.

[;)]



Peltonx -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/25/2014 12:29:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo


There is no Soviet, "I win button."
[;)]


Personally I like to stick with facts unlike most people around here.

Your saying if a person wins 97 out of 97 battles it is not a I win button?

Yes the Middle Earth Rule has been around for a while, but other rules have changed, which have made 1v1=2v1 and I win button.

You can as many others figure out that you only need to bomb the hex with 5-10 planes and then attack with X cv and you win 100% of the time, this is new unlike the 1v1=2v1 rule.
Them are the facts and not an opinion.



Saper2229 -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/25/2014 3:46:20 PM)

1:1=2:1 can do this attack. WiTE is strategic game, not casino. Maybe 1,5:1 (1,3 ore 1,4) for victory more right then 1:1

[image]local://upfiles/37821/7F28973860B043C884560A6B00D92DF8.jpg[/image]



Michael T -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/25/2014 7:29:45 PM)

This example really makes the game look farcical. No more need be said.



Wheat -> RE: The core problem with WitE+ (1/27/2014 5:36:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

This example really makes the game look farcical. No more need be said.


+1 No more need be said.



Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.890625