11th Army? (Full Version)

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



Message

pbcrnk -> 11th Army? (2/15/2019 9:48:18 AM)

So in the middle of winter 42 11th Army goes away...does another come about or do I just attach those units to other corps?



fritzfarlig -> RE: 11th Army? (2/15/2019 10:17:54 AM)

in the logfile you can see all what comes and go in all turns



pbcrnk -> RE: 11th Army? (2/15/2019 5:42:28 PM)

poof gone....nothing due thru the summer



Neogodhobo -> RE: 11th Army? (2/15/2019 6:41:33 PM)

11th Army is not gone. Well, it is, technically, but all its manpower went into creating Army Group Don. This is due to Hitler reorganizing the Southern Front in the winter of 42. Army group Don should stay active until early 1943, when it will merge back as Army Group South. Von Manstein was leading AGD and their purpose was to create a line between Army Group A, and B.



pbcrnk -> RE: 11th Army? (2/15/2019 8:54:51 PM)

All well and good but apparently I now have to attach all those corps to other armies now. Waste of admin points...



Chris21wen -> RE: 11th Army? (2/16/2019 6:15:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pbcrnk

All well and good but apparently I now have to attach all those corps to other armies now. Waste of admin points...



That's how it was, Hitler interferring.



Aufklaerungs -> RE: 11th Army? (2/16/2019 5:53:23 PM)

This is an example of one of the more ridiculous detractors from the game.
The player is cursed with the outcomes of historical mistakes even when he steers clear of repeating those mistakes. What happens to sixth army units when a player when either avoids Stalingrad or defeats the Soviet armies of the Stalingrad front? What happens to the historically destroyed units when the Soviet player opts not to defend Stalingrad?



Great_Ajax -> RE: 11th Army? (2/17/2019 2:48:45 AM)

Units aren’t automatically removed from the game based on their historical destruction dates.

Trey


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aufklaerungs

This is an example of one of the more ridiculous detractors from the game.
The player is cursed with the outcomes of historical mistakes even when he steers clear of repeating those mistakes. What happens to sixth army units when a player when either avoids Stalingrad or defeats the Soviet armies of the Stalingrad front? What happens to the historically destroyed units when the Soviet player opts not to defend Stalingrad?




Denniss -> RE: 11th Army? (2/17/2019 9:27:42 AM)

In previous WitE versions the Stalingrad units were either all withdrawn or just those that were rebuilt and became active on another front like france (can't remember exactly).
In 1.08, with a disband option now available, I changed that to have units disband that were rebuilt but sent to France/Italy while those rebuilt and sent back to East will stay (unless they came back as other units then they will disband too).



Great_Ajax -> RE: 11th Army? (2/17/2019 2:56:40 PM)

The philosophy with all units to include the destroyed Stalingrad and Bagration units was the units were only withdrawn from the game if they were rebuilt and transferred to another theater. Historically destroyed units that didn't transfer stay on the Eastern Front. There are also numerous units that historically disbanded in the East that remain in the game. Not sure how things look now since I handed these scenarios off but units that were disbanded (not necessarily destroyed) were left untouched. These include units like the 27th Panzer Division (disbanded April 43) and the numerous Luftwaffe Recon Squadrons that were disbanded in the winter of 41/42. The intent was never to arbitrarily remove these units based on historical loss dates.

Trey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

In previous WitE versions the Stalingrad units were either all withdrawn or just those that were rebuilt and became active on another front like france (can't remember exactly).
In 1.08, with a disband option now available, I changed that to have units disband that were rebuilt but sent to France/Italy while those rebuilt and sent back to East will stay (unless they came back as other units then they will disband too).




Denniss -> RE: 11th Army? (2/17/2019 6:54:38 PM)

The Stalingrad units were mostly changed from withdraw to disband - you couldn't do this because you hadn't this feature available (and it's still missing in WitW).



MechFO -> RE: 11th Army? (2/19/2019 1:51:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

The Stalingrad units were mostly changed from withdraw to disband - you couldn't do this because you hadn't this feature available (and it's still missing in WitW).


So the original Enterprise gets scrapped instead of scuttled once the the Essex class Enterprise is launched.

Still makes no sense.

I should have kept my list of corrections.



Aufklaerungs -> RE: 11th Army? (2/19/2019 3:37:06 PM)

My compliments to Denniss et al for rectifying the automatic removal of Army Group B units from the Axis OB in 1943. Two remaining examples (among some others) of units withdrawn or disbanded automatically in Spring 43 are XIV PzK, 29th Motorized Division - (historically both reformed and re-deployed to Sicily in Jul 43 in response to Operation Husky)

11th Army is a perfect illustration of unwarranted removal. In Nov 42, 11th Army was in the process of redeploying to Army Group North. The Stalingrad contingency was the single reason for aborting this redeployment. Army Group Don was created to deal with this contingency absorbing 11th Army Divisions into 1st PzA, 4th PzA and 17th A. If 6th Army is not surrounded in Nov 43, why is 11th Army removed from the OB?

Summer 1944 (historic destruction date of AGC) used to be another programmed period to remove unit groupings automatically without any situational justification. Hopefully, these units have been revised to remain in play.



Neogodhobo -> RE: 11th Army? (2/19/2019 4:51:50 PM)

I agree that a bit more freedom on how to operate the disband/withdrawal aspect would be nice. Maybe even have some events that require making choices. ( say the western front is in need of troops, YOU get to chose who goes, and who stay)



Great_Ajax -> RE: 11th Army? (2/19/2019 10:29:11 PM)

These issues are mainly fixed with the new theater box system in WitE 2. You can move these units around however you wish if you choose full control over the theater boxes. There is an option to use the WitE version of arrivals and withdrawals if you do not want to manage forces all over Europe. Entirely the player's choice.

Trey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neogodhobo

I agree that a bit more freedom on how to operate the disband/withdrawal aspect would be nice. Maybe even have some events that require making choices. ( say the western front is in need of troops, YOU get to chose who goes, and who stay)




Neogodhobo -> RE: 11th Army? (2/19/2019 10:49:07 PM)

[&o]



uw06670 -> RE: 11th Army? (2/22/2019 7:09:22 PM)



quote:

There is an option to use the WitE version of arrivals and withdrawals if you do not want to manage forces all over Europe


Very cool



pbcrnk -> RE: 11th Army? (3/14/2019 10:20:38 AM)

I don't mind historical events sparking...I'm about to lose the Italians now and I get that. They were invaded and so that's acceptable. But the "that's how it was...hitler" is bs. I am Hitler...I am the leader of this invasion. No reason for 11th Army HQ to go away. Apparently it'll be fixed in pt 2 but unacceptable in this game.



Chris21wen -> RE: 11th Army? (3/16/2019 6:55:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pbcrnk

I don't mind historical events sparking...I'm about to lose the Italians now and I get that. They were invaded and so that's acceptable. But the "that's how it was...hitler" is bs. I am Hitler...I am the leader of this invasion. No reason for 11th Army HQ to go away. Apparently it'll be fixed in pt 2 but unacceptable in this game.


It's a historical wargame so historical things happen and most definitely not unacceptable as you say. Yes, it probably would be good to explore situations were nothing like this happens but then it becomes fantasy.



SparkleyTits -> RE: 11th Army? (3/16/2019 2:08:11 PM)

I have noticed there are a few different pulling forces for us players

In this example the two forces that are sometimes diametrically opposed are, alot of players want the game to be as historical as possible even if it hurts gameplay or intuitive mechanics
Others would prefer more freedom of choice over their own decision making and more intuitive gameplay at the loss of historical accuracy

I personally think the balance between the two is as good as could be expected from such a great game to give both types of people what they hope for but pleasing everybody to the nth degree is unfortunately an impossible job
I just try to accept the mechanics I am given as they are and work around them where possible otherwise I would pull my own hair out and lessen my enjoyment because of it [:D]



Zug -> RE: 11th Army? (3/16/2019 2:35:38 PM)

Until I played as the Russian it didn't bother me. But once I had, I realized that 'historical constraints' only apply to the German side.

The Russian player can build whatever, whenever. Pool levels act as a brake, but it's odd that each side is playing under a different rule set.

If the Russian played under the same rules it would be a different game. If reinforcements for example were only historical with no ability to build them on the fly. Or if production was evacuated from cities on a historical schedule even if that city is under no threat it would all play out quite differently.



SparkleyTits -> RE: 11th Army? (3/16/2019 2:45:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zug

Until I played as the Russian it didn't bother me. But once I had, I realized that 'historical constraints' only apply to the German side.

The Russian player can build whatever, whenever. Pool levels act as a brake, but it's odd that each side is playing under a different rule set.

If the Russian played under the same rules it would be a different game. If reinforcements for example were only historical with no ability to build them on the fly. Or if production was evacuated from cities on a historical schedule even if that city is under no threat it would all play out quite differently.


I would imagine that is a balancing issue tbh
If Axis had control of their own asset production it would likely be exploited to the point where the devs had to step in and change something I'd guess

For the Soviets I imagine it could be possible to limit their more liberal creativity but I would throw my PC across the room and then cry myself to sleep if I had to play with a system that is similar to opening turn 1 as them on a 1942+ campaign scenario.
Starting those scenarios and seeing such a wasteful mess on every hex of the map makes my soul hurt [:D]

Both sides would probably need a softer middle ground somewhere to make it work but it's a good point Zug!



Zug -> RE: 11th Army? (3/16/2019 4:45:43 PM)

Perhaps so but it's odd. And anyway if you have the goals of both being balanced and historical you have no chance of doing either. And that's what we have with WitE.

Balance is a slippery slope anyway. It's gamey and only a consideration for fair multiplayer.

I was really surprised when I saw how the Russian could build whatever he wanted. While the German has none of this capability, cannot even create a new HQ. Why not? And why can the Russian?



56ajax -> RE: 11th Army? (3/17/2019 6:25:18 AM)

Well the game tries to set some historical limits thats probably Why, Why Not.

As for the Soviets historically they appeared to have an almost infinite capacity to place new Armies on the field of battle, with massive manpower resources not seen in the game.

If you open up the 42 campaign and check the Soviet OOB it is very comprehensive, and perhaps impossible to build from 41 with the Admin points allocated.

I suppose all those units could come as reinforcements but the problem there is the state of Soviet industry, which may have been over run.

Personally I think there should be an option to allow the Axis to create base grade units on a very limited basis, which would follow the historical model; a larger OOB lacking substance.



chaos45 -> RE: 11th Army? (3/17/2019 11:03:54 AM)

Yes the Soviet side is fairly handicapped compared to historical OOB with a 1941 start.

Soviet side in game has millions fewer in replacements than in real life and a much lower level of training on new units in 1941 than the real life situation, this compounds to give the Germans a massive edge in 1941 and into 1942 compared to historical. As well the AP system limits the 1941 soviet player to building and manning many fewer units than the 1942 historical OOB.

In real life the Germans Intel vastly underestimated soviet capabilities, they had 0 chance of defeating the soviets in 1941 and just didnt know it...and in all honesty they still had 0 chance historically of beating them in 1942 but didnt know it. The game carries on as if the german estimates were correct and the soviets had extremely limited manpower reserves...when they actually had something like 10+ million trained reservists on top of the field army in 1941 they could call up...and If I remember right its closer to 15 million trained military reservist...yes these werent fully integrated military manpower but had all already completed basic military training as required of that time.



thedoctorking -> RE: 11th Army? (3/17/2019 3:03:16 PM)

They have to make a game of it. I play Advanced Squad Leader a lot, and there are a bunch of scenarios that are about "how can you get beaten less badly than the historical side did?" It is always somewhat frustrating when you "win" with one squad left standing, that will certainly get wiped out on the next turn, but you managed to hold out for the required amount of time, so that's a win in game terms. This game does make the Axis ahistorically strong so that each side has a chance to gain an actual victory.

It would be nice if there were a historical scenario. There was some talk about creating one using the editor but nothing came of it.



Crackaces -> RE: 11th Army? (3/17/2019 6:04:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

They have to make a game of it. I play Advanced Squad Leader a lot, and there are a bunch of scenarios that are about "how can you get beaten less badly than the historical side did?" It is always somewhat frustrating when you "win" with one squad left standing, that will certainly get wiped out on the next turn, but you managed to hold out for the required amount of time, so that's a win in game terms. This game does make the Axis ahistorically strong so that each side has a chance to gain an actual victory.

It would be nice if there were a historical scenario. There was some talk about creating one using the editor but nothing came of it.


I developed rules for integrating Fotress Europa and Advanced Squad Leader. The squad leader rule about morale dropping 1 per 10% losses over 20% made retreat an option :) basically holding too long meant elimination of the unit in Fortress Europa..but I hear you ..



MattFL -> RE: 11th Army? (3/28/2019 9:37:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

I play Advanced Squad Leader a lot, and there are a bunch of scenarios that are about "how can you get beaten less badly than the historical side did?" It is always somewhat frustrating when you "win" with one squad left standing, that will certainly get wiped out on the next turn, ....


It's never even the slightest bit frustrating to win an ASL scenario even if it's the last broken crew who self-rallies under DM in my final half turn and then survives withering defensive fire to eliminate an enemy squad and 9-2 leader in Close Combat that brings the win. Frustrating? Bah...GLORIOUS. **** like that actually happening is what makes it the greatest game ever made. [:D][:D]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.394531