RE: Play Balance in China (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

wodin -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/1/2006 12:54:36 PM)

I just dont understand why they made HoI continuous time. It just seems bizarre at this level.

Oh yes I do know. They didnt have to actually build a new engine!!



wosung -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/1/2006 6:42:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

HoI and HoI2 are not real time, they are continuous time.

You can pause whenever you want, for as long as you want, and do whatever you want.

Your comments about the production model and wear and tear on units tells me that you have never really played and/or understood how HoI works.



pffft: thats just trotzkist sophism:[>:]

1. Nearly every RTS game is pausable. So nearly every RTS game is continuous time. Now we can call all the RTS games continuous time games (CTG), if you like. But that doesn't cange a thing. [:-]

2. My comments about production model and wear and tear were comments about what I would like to see in mwif, or in fact in any good ww2 grand strategy game - not about HOI.

3. And yes: I do know about HOIs unit upgrades and brigade attachments, cause I'v been playing both of them. But there's no division OOB or production numbers of tanks etc in HOI -just a % strenght bar. [:(]

4. Hope you're not Japanese (in the way you percieve the Japanese yourself). [;)]

Regards

wosung



Manic Inertia -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/2/2006 10:04:54 AM)

Shannon, I have a small favour to ask you.

I have politely requested the forum user 'Panzerjaeger Hortlund' to desist from making what I consider to be an ignorant and racist remark about japanese people every time he contributes to this forum. He has ignored this request, and as I have several japanese acquaintancies, and I find this highly offensive.

I beleive that in permitting this to continue, you risk compromising the moral integrity of this forum. Please would you immediately delete any postings which contain racist remarks from now on, or even consider blocking such users from contributing at all?



Caranorn -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/2/2006 2:47:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Manic Inertia

Shannon, I have a small favour to ask you.

I have politely requested the forum user 'Panzerjaeger Hortlund' to desist from making what I consider to be an ignorant and racist remark about japanese people every time he contributes to this forum. He has ignored this request, and as I have several japanese acquaintancies, and I find this highly offensive.

I beleive that in permitting this to continue, you risk compromising the moral integrity of this forum. Please would you immediately delete any postings which contain racist remarks from now on, or even consider blocking such users from contributing at all?


I believe that'd be an issue for a moderator (I doubt Steve has time for this and I certainly'd be astonished if this was his role).

And yes, I also find that quote doubious (and certainly not descriptive of any Japanese I ever met).



hakon -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/2/2006 3:21:51 PM)

In principle, HoI (or HoI 2) could be great games. Their main drawbacks are the combination of the use of the Europa Universalis engine (taylored for a reinessance game), and the lack of custom mechanics for air and naval warfare (which essentially used slightly modified land combat mechanics).

I do believe that a real time game, like HoI, is quite possible, with a more specialized engine. As it stands, HoI is really only a decent game when it comes to land combat.



wfzimmerman -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/2/2006 4:50:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hakon
...

I do believe that a real time game, like HoI, is quite possible, with a more specialized engine. As it stands, HoI is really only a decent game when it comes to land combat.


But it is fun as hell watching those little airplanes fly back and forth on missions.



YohanTM2 -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 1:15:22 AM)

Manic,

You need to email a moderator and include quotes from any posts you find offensive.



hakon -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 4:29:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

quote:

ORIGINAL: hakon
...

I do believe that a real time game, like HoI, is quite possible, with a more specialized engine. As it stands, HoI is really only a decent game when it comes to land combat.


But it is fun as hell watching those little airplanes fly back and forth on missions.



Actually, I find it quite frustrating. When I send my waves of stukas against big concentration of ground troops, they have almost zero effect, while if I send them vs a single (dispersed) division, the division is massacred. Essentially, in HoI, planes are mostely usefull for massacring fleeing foes, while classic ground support and interdiction is almost pointless.

It also frustrates me that regardless of my radar cover, my fighters fly around at random when bombers are incoming,instead of intercepting the bombers like they should.



Mziln -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 8:04:54 PM)

I bought HoI when it was new.

I found it unusual that a strategic game needed to set the time for your attacks. If this were a tactical game I could understand this but this was supposed to be a strategic game. RTS belongs to tactical games IMO.

I enjoyed the production portion of the game until I found that there was a world boycott of selling raw materials to Germany.

Then the first patch came out and I couldn't patch the game. I called customer service and they wanted to sign me up for their newsletter and would not address my problem.

I returned the HoI and swapped it for CIV3. At least I could patch CIV3.

Then I got into the CWiF Beta a more strategic game, simpler logistics system, a political system, and lots of options.

With a strategic game I prefer political actions/reactions, production, and combat. Using a turn based system.

The WiF turn based system gives you a simulation of the planning required for strategic operations.

With a RTS your just hoping you pushed some units in the right direction.

With a strategic game unless you are out of supply. I would hope my logistics people would keep supplying the beans, bullets, and bandages to keep my units up to strength.

If I wanted to track every plane, pilot, tank, gun, infantryman, and etc. I would be pushing for a computer version of “Campaigns for North Africa”.



Ballista -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 8:10:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

(...)
If I wanted to track every plane, pilot, tank, gun, infantryman, and etc. I would be pushing for a computer version of “Campaigns for North Africa”.
(...)


Heh. I saw that game actually being "played" (if that's what you call it). I came to the conclusion after observing them for awhile that those participating were not quite human..... [:)]



Mziln -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 8:21:50 PM)

There was another game on North Africa (I have fogotten the name). Where you actualy plotted your moves using terain features as reference points. You wrote your moves and your enemy tried move your units using what your wrote.

The instructons said this was because the units actualy had to navagate like ships at sea.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 8:56:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ballista


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

(...)
If I wanted to track every plane, pilot, tank, gun, infantryman, and etc. I would be pushing for a computer version of “Campaigns for North Africa”.
(...)


Heh. I saw that game actually being "played" (if that's what you call it). I came to the conclusion after observing them for awhile that those participating were not quite human..... [:)]


I own a copy of that game. It is infamous for the Italians using more water in the desert than the other countries, because they cook pasta.

I've never played it. We just looked at the rules and shook our heads in disbelief.



Ballista -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 10:51:27 PM)

LOL ! I've heard that before about that game.

Campaigns for North Africa is definitely a "curio" game and a conversation piece at best without a doubt. I used to play Drang Nach Osten for awhile. Definitely only for the hard-core groganard wargamer with nothing better to do....
[:)]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/3/2006 11:06:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ballista

LOL ! I've heard that before about that game.

Campaigns for North Africa is definitely a "curio" game and a conversation piece at best without a doubt. I used to play Drang Nach Osten for awhile. Definitely only for the hard-core groganard wargamer with nothing better to do....
[:)]



Ah, then I guess I'm a "hard-core grognard wargamer with nothing better to do" - or was. We played Drang Nach Osten weekly for over a year.



Ballista -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/6/2006 8:40:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ballista

LOL ! I've heard that before about that game.

Campaigns for North Africa is definitely a "curio" game and a conversation piece at best without a doubt. I used to play Drang Nach Osten for awhile. Definitely only for the hard-core groganard wargamer with nothing better to do....
[:)]



Ah, then I guess I'm a "hard-core grognard wargamer with nothing better to do" - or was. We played Drang Nach Osten weekly for over a year.


That's cool. We gave up after 2 months when the owner's cat attacked the map (or so the story went) after the Germans got to Moscow in Nov I 1941 (the owner was one of the Russian players) :) I've picked up copies of Fire in the East, Scorched Earth, and The Urals). I still sometimes take all the maps out and lay as many of them out as possible (I'm a map-o-phile after all :) ) It makes you really appreciate just how far the Germans actually got. Now to see it in CWIF (and eventually in MWIF) it also is impressive.....



YohanTM2 -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/7/2006 2:51:31 AM)

quote:

when the owner's cat attacked the map


It's waz ze damn cat mein fuehrer, otherwise Moscow was ours...



Mziln -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/7/2006 5:15:00 AM)

It's vaz der verdammt cat Mein Fuehrer, otherwise Moscow was tot...

hehehehehehe [:D]






Manic Inertia -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/7/2006 10:04:50 AM)

I once inhaled a smidge of coffee whilst leaning over an ETO map during my poor defence against what was rapidly becoming a horribly successful '40 Sealion. Most of the Kreigmarine, several german corps and every British unit was immediately shifted several hundred kilometres rendered permanently inoperative by coffee. I've never successfully persuaded my opponent it was an accident, even after 14 years..



Ballista -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/7/2006 5:08:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Manic Inertia

I once inhaled a smidge of coffee whilst leaning over an ETO map during my poor defence against what was rapidly becoming a horribly successful '40 Sealion. Most of the Kreigmarine, several german corps and every British unit was immediately shifted several hundred kilometres rendered permanently inoperative by coffee. I've never successfully persuaded my opponent it was an accident, even after 14 years..


Gott Im Himmel !* Der dretted spild koffee devense ! [:)]

*German speakers please forgive my mangling of your language and 40's Hollywood Nazi character dialog.....




Caranorn -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/8/2006 3:12:06 PM)

I believe all of us have those spilled coffee stories (in my case it's usually spilled Pepsi or a beer, the Pepsi is of course worse as everything gets sticky...). With Fire in the East, Scorched Earth and Urals my problem was always table space, today I couldn't even set that trio up anymore as I lost one of my big tables. sad really it's a wonderful game (though I don't even have all the Scorched Earth counters cut out as I never managed to play into 1942 (FiE is entirely punched but that's because I bought that game a month or two before I got SE and Urals)).

P.S.: Only last month I had to reprint and remount a number of counters for a game of my own I was testing, the spilled Pepsi after washing away half a civil war army had also soaked into several of my counters which started to disintegrate the following day, luckily that doesn't happen to pofessionally printed counters.



Erictpaladin -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/18/2006 1:28:27 AM)

Hi there. Watch the forum about this game for a while now and decide to post a question about the china supply situation. All my Wif is in the addict but did it not include in the rule that if a unit could trace movement to a road once it hit the road or railway it could trace unlimited number of hexes to a city for supply? If I rember correclty bewteen that rule and the hq rule for supply only a few areas where actully dangerous to be cut off in. Am I miss rembering the rule? I admit it could come from Fire in the east or another game but I thought this one belong to WIF.



DavidFaust -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/18/2006 2:48:50 AM)

Regarding space problems.....

My partner wanted a nice new tables and chairs.
I wanted a nice BIG table to play war games on (mainly WIF)
She would look at different styles and colors
I would set out my WIF maps on the tables and talked sizes.
She found a table she liked, I found the sizes I needed.
I got a large draw made under the table that could store all maps.
Playing WIF is much more enjoyable and knowing your game is out of harms way is a great piece of mind.



Mziln -> RE: Play Balance in China (3/18/2006 6:07:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erictpaladin

If I rember correclty bewteen that rule and the hq rule for supply only a few areas where actully dangerous to be cut off in. Am I miss rembering the rule?


You have a number of movement points to trace supply from the unit to:

(1) A HQ.
(2) A secondary supply source.
(3) A primary supply source.
(4) A convoy route to a primary supply source.

From a HQ or secondary supply source you also have a number of movement points to trace supply to:

(1) A primary supply source.
(2) A convoy route to a primary supply source.

Both sets of movement points are effected by weather.

Rail hexes and convoy routes don't count aginst the movement points from the HQ or secondary supply source to the primary supply source.



Zorachus99 -> RE: Play Balance in China (4/17/2006 6:35:09 AM)

[&o]
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Ah, then I guess I'm a "hard-core grognard wargamer with nothing better to do" - or was. We played Drang Nach Osten weekly for over a year.


[&o]


I have Almost every Europa ADG in print. Fire in the East was by far the most mentally disabling boardgame ever! Our game was going slower than the actual war - 8 hrs x 2 weekends a month.

It gives me a hankering to pull out Narvik or one of the other board games to pore over :D



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Play Balance in China (4/17/2006 11:19:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I have Almost every Europa ADG in print. Fire in the East was by far the most mentally disabling boardgame ever! Our game was going slower than the actual war - 8 hrs x 2 weekends a month.

It gives me a hankering to pull out Narvik or one of the other board games to pore over :D


I have an excellent little book on Narvik that describes the "battle" in a modest amount of detail. What sticks in my mind was the submarine commander remaining completely hidden and firing a series of torpedoes right on target but they all ran under the targets because of a defect in the torpedo design. The targets never even knew they were under attack. That book is now in one of the 8 large boxes that contain most of ny military history books - just not enough shelf space in this condo.



trees trees -> RE: Play Balance in China (6/7/2006 8:14:37 PM)

Unfortunately I don't have time to re-read this entire thread right now but I will soon. I don't think I've seen it since page 2 or so.

But the latest discussion in the map thread has led me to a few basic questions. Some people feel that the Chinese and Japanese need more units to make this a workable theater. Personally I disagree, as other folks including Steve have pointed out this has ripple effects throughout the game. But at the same time it seems that the cWiF system of unlimited Divisions is coming to MWiF as well. So that is in direct conflict with the thought of not expanding the units.

My question is: is unlimited Div breakdown cast in stone, as the change to a unified map scale is? Or will it be a new option that can be toggled on and off?

If I had unlimited Divisions I would bid a bit higher to play the Japanese, that's for sure. (With SCS tranport they could rule everything from the Arabian Sea to beyond the Coral Sea) If I did, on the first turn I think I would build three INF. I can't recall if they have that many left in their at-start force pool but I think so. If not, then two and the MTN corps, or maybe an ATR instead. In J/F I would ship these in to China on one impulse, rail them forward on the next two impulses, and break them down just behind the front line. Maybe one of the at-start INF as well. Then in M/A 6 or 8 divisions commence the ooze offensive around the Nationalist lines. The 1-4 Inf Division is the best unit in the Japanese OOB, I take a MIL as a loss against China before that one currently. If playing without Chinese Attack Weakness, the Chinese can swat these as they come in, somewhat, but in mountains backed up by Japanese air this isn't so simple. (And without Chinese Attack Weakness the Japanese are pushed back to Korea by 1944 anyways). The Chinese are soon threatened everywhere. They can break down one CAV and a few INF, but then their front lines weaken even more, and their irreplaceable MIL from cities behind enemy lines get more vulnerable.

So, I would play without this. I think a solution to China is to have less units, not more.



Froonp -> RE: Play Balance in China (6/7/2006 9:30:58 PM)

quote:

My question is: is unlimited Div breakdown cast in stone, as the change to a unified map scale is? Or will it be a new option that can be toggled on and off?


For your information trees trees, the "unlimited" DIV breakdown will not be unlimited, as Steve is about to code it.
It will be unlimited in theory, but the Corps used to obtain both divisions won't be rebuildable, unless both DIV are destroyed or reformed.
So it will be limited in reality.

You will be able to play without Divisions & ART I believe, but I don't know if "unlimited" breakdown will be an option you will be able to toggle on / off.




trees trees -> RE: Play Balance in China (6/7/2006 10:00:01 PM)

(and yes, I figured out how to get my browser to work here, the login button was several screens off to the right. I put a post in the help forum about it, hopefully that might help somebody else).

I re-read this whole thread. Even before I've been re-hashing the ideas about China lately, it is clear that some of these discussions are circular. I guess I'll just have to wait to see how the play-testing turns out like everyone else.

I well understand that you have to have corps to make these new divisions. My point is that Japan has these available moreso than China. (I think I would also build both of Japan's C-47's as well with unlimited div). Japan has an excellent mix of sturdy and replaceable MIL to use. Many of China's are not replaceable. China does have 5 INF, but they need these to man the lines while the fragile MIL hold the safer areas.

I've been thinking more about the idea that Japan can concentrate in an area and gain an easy advantage. I think this is less true on the bigger map. If Japan sets up too heavily to drive on Chang-Sha, the Communists will soon be in Tai-Yuan. If Japan goes heavily for Si-An, it's lines of communication with Shanghai may soon be threatened. I think Sun Tzu would enjoy this new game.

Divisions is itself an option. I hope the change to increased Divisions is an option. I hope some testers try this theater without Divisions at all and see what this does. It could be that is what creates more balance. ?

Another thought - everyone seems to agree on more WarLord units, including in Manchuria. I thought the Manchurian TERRitorial units nicely represent those already.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Play Balance in China (6/7/2006 10:08:43 PM)

I just pinned a thread about optional rules to the top of the forum. It contains a link to the whole thread on same and identifies the post which gives the current list of 80.



composer99 -> RE: Play Balance in China (6/24/2006 2:32:37 PM)

I don't recall having said much on play balance in China except for a few comments in the map thread, but I think I shall mention my own CWiF and WiF:FE experiences playing in the China.

Having had the benefit of living in the same town as (the apparently dreaded) Andrew Rader I've played a fair bit of WiF:FE in just the four years I've been playing it. I also went to WiFCon in Michigan last summer. I think, if one includes DoD games, that I've played almost 10 games of WiF (and another one on the way in a concentrated, week-long burst of playing this July here in Ottawa when Rader is back in town for a spell taking a break from being at MIT).

Excluding the times in DoD when Japan did not attack China (twice, once when I was Japan), if I recall correctly, twice in WiF:FE Japan conquered China or had otherwise crippled it. Once (at WiFCon), China got so strong, and Japan lost so many units to bad attacks, that it was able to mount a counter-offensive in '43-'44 to throw Japan out and even go into Manchuria (which I know is unrealistic from a historical point of view, but there is a lot about WiF that can be argued to be unrealistic to some extent or another), and the rest of the time a sort of stalemate set in, with Japan making some gains in the early game and China making some (but not as much) gains in the late game.

This actually corresponds roughly with the CWiF games I played (all solo): the Japanese got the combat results and the weather they needed to knock China out of the war (once via conquest, once just a crippling blow) twice, they got poor combat results and weather once which allowed the Chinese to start hammering at them, and the rest of the time the Japanese would make some modest gains (Si-An, Kwei-Yang, sometimes Kunming) but not have the good attack results or weather to really take it to China.

I will grant that these recollections are neither a statistically significant number of samples, nor are they clear enough (except from the WiFCon game) that they could be considered conclusive. But I just thought I'd mention it. The larger map relative to the number of units may make it seem like a real war of manouevre can be waged, but since the units' movement rates do not change the new scale makes it take longer for them to get around, which means that it is not easy for either Japan or China to muster the power they need in any one location to launch major attacks.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.171875