RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Halsey -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 1:48:37 AM)

The ability to do too many impossible things.[:D]




gottagofish -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 2:28:28 AM)

For the Japanese player, I would like to see what was produced by location. Maybe a toggle. Just to know for sure that there was enough oil to get HI to work, etc.

It is very frustraiting when loading transports to leave a fractional unit behind because I picked one less ship than the comuter decided was needed to load the full unit, and there are 50 unused APs in port!

How about road upgrades? Many roads were built during the war, we have all sorts of engineer units, why can't we upgrade roads?

Carrier training. The war lasts 4+ years and we can't train one air wing to be carier capable. There are more ships than capable air units.

Most definately, a better decision tree for carrier plane attacks! Maybe something you can set up yourself as is done for missions. Rank order them like CVs, BBs, CAs, etc.

The VERY MOST IMPROTANT ITEM to add would be 10 hours to each day just so I can play this game and there be no other distractions!! [:D][:D][:D][&o][&o][&o]




Caltone -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 2:29:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mapr
In my eyes main flaw is this combat report/animation change in 1.60... Almost game breaker.


What changed?


Only real problem I'm having at the moment is where a unit crosses a river an automatically launches a shock attack. Makes sense in some cases, but still kills me when I have 2 divisions laying siege and I bring an ENG unit up for support. Instead on falling into the line they rush through and shock attack.

Banzai!
[sm=00000106.gif]



tabpub -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 2:50:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I have to be a weirdo, but I like the land combat mechanics.

As for bugs, no game is perfect so I try to live with this fact [:)]

And house rules may prevent weird things, so I use them.



I agree in that land combat requires some forethought and I don't worry about "stacking".
But where do you use house rules TD? In a different thread, you said this:

Nah, no PBEM game for me. That or social life





and I choose... ahem... social life

So, you play against the AI and follow house rules? How did you and the AI agree on the terms?[;)]



rtrapasso -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 3:40:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jay102

I think the unfriendly interface. So many different data crowded together, without a well-designed classification to guide player to acquire the most important information quickly, plus the tiny fonts combo. Secondly, some micromanagement is really annoying, such as LCUs must be loaded one by one.


I guess what one thinks is the main flaw in WITP is how you look at it: if you are looking at it as a game that simulates WW2, there are MULTIPLE big problems - worst (i guess) being the logistics model (too much supply, and those supplies/fuel, etc. moving too fast allowing all kinds of weirdness).

If you just look at it as a game, i would guess units disappearing would head the top of my list (which can be due to multiple causes).



Nikademus -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 4:16:11 AM)

The biggest flaw in the game IMO is the same flaw that marred it's predesessor; Pacific War.

The Amphibious landing routine. Its too simplified and too easy to do. It's better than it was in Pacwar thanks to the introduction of preperation points. Landing an unprepared division can result in as much as 1/3 of it's assault power being disabled, but I always wanted to see more. But underneath that...its still basically the same as in PacWar...you want to invade? tether together a bunch of AK's or better, some AP's and will travel.

As i read about the big campaigns more and more in WWII, Burma....Sicily, Italy....France a central bottleneck kept coming up. The biggest factor that forced the Allies to fight the war the way they did. Italy (followed by Burma) represented the greatest example...a mountanous country just begging for flanking seaward attacks given the slogging match that a forward attack presented. Yet it was'nt done to the degree one might expect why?

landing craft....landing craft....and more landing craft. There were never enough available....and another theater seemed to always have a priority on them...first D-day...then the continuing Pacific War. The British sceamed for years on conducting amphibious landings to outflank the jungles of Northern Burma or even bypass Burma in favor of a landing in Malaya....never materialized till 45. why.....in Witp, just load up a few AK's or AP's! the long vulnerable coastline just begs for it. In real life....nope, not enough landing craft. They couldnt' lay hands on em.

I understand why its the way it is in WitP. I'm not bashing this game. Hell, i love this game and it is a quality product and i'm proud to have been associated with it. But as the thread asks (even if jokingly) if i had to pick an area of weakness that most sticks out, one i'd like to see improved in a future game or successor product...it would be that.

how to fix? not totally sure. its a thorny issue. Such a game has to allow the amphibious landing type of operation which can range anywhere from a transport dropping anchor and the troops wadding ashore in rafts or infaltables to a slightly more dedicated (but still crude) Watchtower type landing that did involve some dedicated landing craft (but inefficiently loaded transports...fortunately there was no resistance or fortifications on the shore that day)

Such a game would have to take into account that fact that the larger the landing force, the greater the need for organization (prep) and specialized craft or else risk increasingly disrupted and disabled units that come ashore in no condition to fight. Most of all the presence of landing craft of which no true Amphibious Assault can be done must be represented in the specific.

How to simulate in WitP within the current framework? Only ideas i came up with back in Alpha were to make lack of prep points 2 to 3 times as severe as they are now. Try to land an unprepped division on any base Atoll or not....and it should be so disrupted and disabled as to be combat ineffective.....the impact should be preportional to the size of the unit, that way small raider type actions could be simulated. so for example, a small battalion sized unit would not suffer as much unprepared as say a Division which is far more complex an operation.

Another idea was to divorce invader unloading rates from the port size which should only apply to a friendly force. AK's and AP's without landing craft should have a super-small unloading rate allowing the defender a chance to push em back into the sea. Such a penalty would especially apply to arty and AFV type equipment....you cant just use the port facilities to unload such beasts. Such as restriction would make Atoll combat without landing craft impossible and suicidal.

Any future Pacific game should un-abstract landing craft. I'd rather see that than un-abstracting supply which while an intriguing idea on the surface also strikes me as a "be careful what you wish for" item. This game already requires a serious amount of micro-management. I love detail, and i'm willing to tackle the challenge of dealing with landing craft and a more detailed amphibious model, but i'm not sure i want to track what islands are getting their bullets, which their allotment of torpedoes, which their allotment of bombs and food etc etc......yikes. This game is long enough to play as it is.
[:D]




stretch -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 5:43:37 AM)

The thing I hate the most.... how can a game crash so often just because you click the exit button on the save screen? That's the stupidest thing I have ever had to deal with in a PC game, and it's been kicking my butt on different computers and on all versions. I wasn't going to complain but it has done it to me 4 times just tonight. ARGH.

Edited to add: I do wait a few seconds before exiting the screen, still happens a lot.



Stwa -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 9:44:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

True, which is why they dropped their original plans for using the WitP engine for a Mediterranean and East Front game.


Terminus, I hate to disagree a little, but I think the WitP engine could be used to sim most any theatre for WWI and WWII, and of course the years in between. I think the main reason there won't be a Med game or East Front game using this system can be found in an interview with Gary, Joel, and the Wargamer..


WG: Computers have changed a lot. How has that affected how you develop and create games?

GG: Well, more powerful computers allow you to put a lot more features into a game. By the same token a lot more are expected of you by the people buying the games. Mostly I think they're expecting more visuals, more bells and whistles, animations and whatnot. With Uncommon Valor and especially with War in the Pacific I'm realizing that these things are hitting a level of complexity that…

JB: …human people aren't supposed to deal with.

GG: I can't keep it in my head anymore. That's it. I hit the wall. I am never ever, ever, ever doing a game like that again.



BlackVoid -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 10:09:54 AM)

Flaws:
Land combat
Submarine combat
Lack of mid-ocean intercepts (depriving the player of a viable strategy of surface convoy raiding by ships).
AC squadron management (we should be able to transfer pilot/planes between units)
Stock map is flawed

All the others, I can live with.

Stacking limits would mean that places are impossible to take (because only units in the same hex can fight). Any kind of stacking limit would BREAK the game because of this.

I do not blame the developers for not wanting to build on the engine. The design was over-ambitious. Too much detail in too many places, eg: commanders for every little unit, japanese industry, altitude mgmt for AC, etc.



ilovestrategy -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 10:25:22 AM)

I haven't played enough to make a list of flaws. It's pretty hard to find flaws when you are incompetent [:D][:D][:D]



msaario -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 10:55:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stretch

The thing I hate the most.... how can a game crash so often just because you click the exit button on the save screen? That's the stupidest thing I have ever had to deal with in a PC game, and it's been kicking my butt on different computers and on all versions. I wasn't going to complain but it has done it to me 4 times just tonight. ARGH.

Edited to add: I do wait a few seconds before exiting the screen, still happens a lot.


But that's better than the game crashing BEFORE you can save it, right [:D]

--Mikko



patrickl -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 11:18:31 AM)

Hi,


quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackVoid


Stacking limits would mean that places are impossible to take (because only units in the same hex can fight). Any kind of stacking limit would BREAK the game because of this.



Well, I don't really think so. You could rotate LCUs, bringing fresh troops while trying to interdict your opponent's supply of fresh troops. Eventually, your opponent will run out of supplies and fighting troops and overwhelming odds should overcome them.[;)]



Stwa -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 1:36:28 PM)

This is a great thread. I just recently purchased WitP (last August) and while reading this thread and listening to some of the concerns, I really think there is NOT much amiss with this sim.

The NO stacking limit thing does not bother me, because I rarely see much of it and even so, stacking to the max could be very risky if the stack gets cut off from supplies. And it would need a lot of supplies.

Ground combat I somewhat remember from Pacific War, but re-reading Irrelavents post on this subject makes me appreciate the ground combat system all the more. Interdicting the defenders supplies makes all the difference in the world, regardless of the size of the force. Bombing them and shelling them prior to deliberate attacks disrupts and de-moralizes the defenders over time, and I like the simplicty of it all.

I haven't seen any dissapearing units as of yet (but maybe I am not looking for them).

Sub combat will be addressed in WPO. (at least I have heard that).

Also, the sim I think is easliy adaptable to other theaters. The community should attempt this NOW, there has been WAY too much time dedicated to re-dos of scenario 15.

Also, the sim could really benefit from some smaller more isolated scenarios, which again the game provides a way to create these. I think the community should attempt these as well.




Terminus -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 2:22:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stwa

Also, the sim I think is easliy adaptable to other theaters. The community should attempt this NOW, there has been WAY too much time dedicated to re-dos of scenario 15.



Having had a ringside seat to the development of WPO, I can tell you that the AI gets confused VERY easily if you tinker with even the smallest of variables. It would probably commit suicide if forced to contend with bases with strange names like Wilhelmshafen or Scapa Flow![8D]



Top Cat -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 3:23:07 PM)

I'd like to see the end of pre-allocated naval targets.

Frustrating to see 10, 20 or even 100 aircraft not drop their bombs/torps because carrier A has already sunk, whilst carriers B, C & D in the same task force are unscathed and untargeted.

ie the dreaded "section unable to locate target"

==> "section not inclined to target the other big nasty enemy ships cause they have wrong name"

Cheers
Top Cat



Terminus -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 3:25:36 PM)

This is not a major flaw, but rather a pet peeve of mine. I'd like to see the Withdraw/Disband Air Group routines only look at plane types, and skip nationality. I have a number of useless VF fragments at various island bases that could have been absorbed into VMF's, if it wasn't for this rule. It wouldn't be historic, I know, but it would be less annoying.



pad152 -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 8:02:40 PM)

Great Game but it's still unfinished!

Production Model - unfinished








Stwa -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/11/2005 11:56:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

Great Game but it's still unfinished!

Production Model - unfinished





Interface - unfinished.

And this is a gripe (i.e. not a flaw). I find the interface not up to professional standards AT ALL. I know its a computerized board game so we are supposed to be more lenient, but I think this game would have been a lot cleaner if developed in windows properly and cut way back on the frivolous graphics. Widescreen mode could have been supported. I know this was easily possible when UV was being developed. (i.e. Close Combat series could do this I think).

The data screens and preferences screens could pop-up over the middle (i.e. not a full screen) and the arcane save screen is just unacceptable. Also the full screen menus you see at the begininning of the game are completely unneccessary and are simply marketing fluff.





TulliusDetritus -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/12/2005 12:47:37 AM)

Tabpub,

that's right, no PBEM for me. Just because it is a huge commitment. I love this game but I don't want to be obsessed. And above all, I don't want to think everyday: "I must send 1, 2 or 3... turns today". The internet -and people out there- is not real world. So no, I stay free. And yes, I already know it: PBEM is the best (I played vs human opponents in UV and the old PacWar).

So I play vs the AI and vs myself (h2h): I recreate the war or some operations.

What house rules? Mostly:

- Ron Saueracker's house rules for ports.
- Leo's house rules for airfields and air strikes.
- Convoys: maximum 10 cargo ships (AK, AP, TK)
- ASW: maximum 4 ships
- Submarines can't leave port if sys is not 0.
etc., etc.

As for the AI, I don't care if it wants to ignore them [:)]



bradfordkay -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/12/2005 2:39:27 AM)

For me the biggest flaw is land movement: there is no difference in the movement rate for units passing through friendly territory and those advancing into unfamiliar enemy held (or formerly enemy held) territory. I would also like a more realistic method of handling rail transport (something like what is used in the GCACW series.

I also wish that there was a mechaninsm for at sea intercepts with SCTFs.

Overall, of course, I am quite happy with WITP. It is, even with its warts, still the best game yet simulating the Pacific Theatre of WW2.



Halsey -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/12/2005 11:49:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
I also wish that there was a mechaninsm for at sea intercepts with SCTFs.


There already is!
It's called luck. If you get good at counting hexes, it can be done.
Slow TF's are easy to intercept. Fast ones are a lot harder.[:D]



siRkid -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 12:12:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

This is not a major flaw, but rather a pet peeve of mine. I'd like to see the Withdraw/Disband Air Group routines only look at plane types, and skip nationality. I have a number of useless VF fragments at various island bases that could have been absorbed into VMF's, if it wasn't for this rule. It wouldn't be historic, I know, but it would be less annoying.



I tried several times during the Beta to get the option to Disband and Destroy aircraft. Fragments could be gotten rid of and the pilots gone back to the pool. Never convinced them. [:(]



AmiralLaurent -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 12:22:28 AM)

I would like to see land logistics management intergrated on the map. Managing trains and trucks like we have to manage barges and ships... but that is probably for the worst of the grognards

The hex size is too great for the land combat. And the land battles are not at all realistic. When a force is defeated in the jungle, it just marches back some miles and sets a new position. It didn't run away for 60 miles. Add to this the logistics that work better than today and the supplies available in too great numbers and...

The greatest flaw in design IMOO is the ressource centers generating supplies. Would be far better to have two kind of supplies : a "civilian" one (food, clothes, etc...) produced by manpower points (with a lot more of manpower everywhere, producing less "manpower points" as they exist today) and a "military" one, produced by HI from ressources. First kind of supply will keep the units in fighting state between battles, second will be used by battles and to generate replacements.



Ron Saueracker -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 12:56:13 AM)

Hmmmm....LOL

So many....[:)]

Biggest one was the obvious lack of much effort or thought being spent on the "grand scheme of things" and hard coding the game in so many places that the editor can't fix the worst offences. The logistics model is too simple and fails in it's job of keeping players reigned in to a reasonable pace and the lack of any form of operatioins model as exists in the Victory Games boardgame of the same name ensures that this is more like a really detailed RTS than a wargame. Shame really.[:(]

I STILL have not ripped it off my HD so the game has something, especially the CHS. I am playing vs the AI simply to see the work the team put in. WOW! What an improvement. Too bad the editor can't fix the mechanics flaws.



Ron Saueracker -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 12:57:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

This is not a major flaw, but rather a pet peeve of mine. I'd like to see the Withdraw/Disband Air Group routines only look at plane types, and skip nationality. I have a number of useless VF fragments at various island bases that could have been absorbed into VMF's, if it wasn't for this rule. It wouldn't be historic, I know, but it would be less annoying.



I tried several times during the Beta to get the option to Disband and Destroy aircraft. Fragments could be gotten rid of and the pilots gone back to the pool. Never convinced them. [:(]


This was one of my peeves as well. Oh well...[8|]



bigjoe96912 -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 5:17:04 AM)

The Major Issue for me is the AI. In an AI game it would be nice if it was more reactionary to your offensive thrusts. I have no problem with the preprogrammed assaults and as historically it is great but when I invade Tarawa early the AI came in with big KB and gave me a pretty good pounding and left. However it allowed the landings to continue, left my entire carrier fleet with 20% damage but intact and salvagable. Then its next appearance was over by Kendi pound an airfield that was abandoned, then it came over around Rabaul and Bombed Buna for 3 days, and has dissapeared again. ( I have no clue where it is.) I captured Wake Island in 11/42 and now the AI is sending piece meal assults with no back up support to try to retake it. So for me it is the AI.



pad152 -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 5:32:39 AM)

quote:

The thing I hate the most.... how can a game crash so often just because you click the exit button on the save screen? That's the stupidest thing I have ever had to deal with in a PC game, and it's been kicking my butt on different computers and on all versions. I wasn't going to complain but it has done it to me 4 times just tonight. ARGH.

Edited to add: I do wait a few seconds before exiting the screen, still happens a lot.


Stretch you may want to defrag your system, it helps a little.



pad152 -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 5:40:24 AM)

quote:

and hard coding the game in so many places that the editor can't fix the worst offences.


Ron

I have to agree, the game seems to have one set of rules for data in the database and another set hidden in the code!

1.Bad design - all the rules should have be data driven.

2.Production - a half-ass system half finished.




tigercub -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 5:47:05 AM)

you must not have played many wargames then!
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I have to be a weirdo, but I like the land combat mechanics.

As for bugs, no game is perfect so I try to live with this fact [:)]

And house rules may prevent weird things, so I use them.






WhoCares -> RE: What's the main flaw of WitP you think? (9/13/2005 1:05:16 PM)

Considering design flaws, I'd also say the interface. Not just the menu designs, button placement, navigation, etc... More with respect to information management. When the players has to continously do information transfers between game screens and external applications and vice versa - it would help the player with this:

quote:

GG: I can't keep it in my head anymore. That's it. I hit the wall. I am never ever, ever, ever doing a game like that again.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6875