RE: Europe map?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Europe map?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Europe map?

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 12:33:46 AM

YohanTM2

Posts: 1143
Joined: 10/7/2002
From: Toronto
Status: offline

Leave it be please. It does effect play so should not be changed for minor cosmetic reasons.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 331

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 12:35:07 AM

Joshuatree

Posts: 507
Joined: 12/30/2007
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

"But I wonder if the Dutch still refer to IJsselmeer as Zuiderzee every so often."

We sure do, most elderly people for sure, and many of us still remember it as the sea that turned into a lake. Great place for surfing and swimming and fishing by the way. *And* it was the only place we held the german onslaught back. The dike itself proved to be a killing ground for those soldiers. They surrendered only after Rotterdam was bombed and Holland surrendered.

Short story: prior to the war lots of german young men went to work on the dutch farms during the summer. Then when war broke out they came again, to the same farms and area they used to work on, and some of them were recognized by the farmers... Weird huh?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 332

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 11:21:14 AM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

Patrice, the thinness of the Limburg salient is not a relevant factor. Cross neutral territory, however small, and it's war! (Consider Portugal and the tiny sizes of East Timor and Macau!) Therefore there has to be some sort of penalty for attacking Belgium through that hex.

And nobody has yet answered my point that the Dusseldorf to Antwerp rail-line crosses Dutch territory, so it is very wrong to let Germany have its use without penalty.

Patrice, could you put up a historical map of Limburg, Liege and the Ardennes, with national borders clearly marked, so people can see what I am talking about? The choke point between Maastricht and the rough terrain of the Ardennes was a major strategic factor that is completely missing from the game ... and was the principal reason for the attack on the Netherlands in the first place.

Surely, apart from the Me-109 point made above, the only significance of the Maastricht hex to peacetime Germany is that it allows a greater projection of force against Liege on the opening impulse? But, in a game with no ZOCs on the impulse of invasion, do the Belgians ever actually defend Liege?

My point is that the threat of a DoW on the Netherlands, with German units then outflanking a forward Belgian defence using a right hook through Rotterdam, is sufficient to discourage a Belgian defence of Liege, whether or not Maastricht is German-controlled ... and on that basis it is therefore safe to be accurate and give the hex to the Netherlands.

One critical point: when do the Belgian defenders actually set up? Do all DoWs have to be made before any invaded neutral sets up, or does each neutral set-up immediately it suffers a DoW? In other words, at set-up do the Belgians know whether or not they have to cover the Dutch border?

Really, defenders ought to set-up immediately they suffer a DoW, because it would be impracticable to rush defenders forward just because a neighbouring country unexpectedly is not invaded.

Please would those players most experienced with this version of the game submit the Belgian defence they would use if the Maastricht hex correctly belonged to the Netherlands? That will then give us something concrete to debate.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 333

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 1:04:22 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline

Isn't the solution about the hex NE of Liege to simply ask Harry Rowland what he thinks. Maybe he isn't aware of the map inaccuracy and wants to fix it? Or maybe he was aware of it, but decided for game play reasons to make the hex German?

I think it's good to bring to his attention our discussion. E. g. the argument that the rail line from D�sseldorf to Antwerp went via the Netherlands is a good one. If you look at the real map then you will see that the German / Belgian border is not very long. It should only have been 2 hexes wide. The hex west of Saarbr�cken is actually Luxembourg and the hex west of D�sseldorf is actually Dutch.

I think it's ahistorical that Germany easily can blitz into Belgium without even DoW'ing the Netherlands. Germany had to attack both countries in the real war. There were reasons for that. With the current border Germany has a 4 hex wide "corridor" to invade Belgium from. So it should be easy to take most of Belgium at the end of the first impulse. Would the Germans have succeeded so well in the real Case Yellow if they hadn't invaded the Netherlands as well?

I guess it's possible to attack the Netherlands in the impulse before you attack Belgium and thus have access to a very long border to attack Belgium.

I believe asking Harry is the way to decide if such a map change is a good thing to do or not.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 334

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 3:49:21 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Patrice, could you put up a historical map of Limburg, Liege and the Ardennes, with national borders clearly marked, so people can see what I am talking about?� The choke point between Maastricht and the rough terrain of the Ardennes was a major strategic factor that is completely missing from the game ... and was the principal reason for the attack on the Netherlands in the first place.

Here is a map. I also added a black line showing what 90 km look like on the map. 90 km is about the distance across an hex.
Also, I have submitted the question of this change to Harry, but the more I look at the map, the less I think we should make it. The hexgrid is simply too large to show that chunck of Dutch land between Belgium & Germany.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 335

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 3:52:05 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

Isn't the solution about the hex NE of Liege to simply ask Harry Rowland what he thinks. Maybe he isn't aware of the map inaccuracy and wants to fix it? Or maybe he was aware of it, but decided for game play reasons to make the hex German?

I think it's good to bring to his attention our discussion. E. g. the argument that the rail line from D�sseldorf to Antwerp went via the Netherlands is a good one. If you look at the real map then you will see that the German / Belgian border is not very long. It should only have been 2 hexes wide. The hex west of Saarbr�cken is actually Luxembourg and the hex west of D�sseldorf is actually Dutch.

quote:

I believe asking Harry is the way to decide if such a map change is a good thing to do or not.

It's done, see post #327.

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 336

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 5:15:54 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Patrice, could you put up a historical map of Limburg, Liege and the Ardennes, with national borders clearly marked, so people can see what I am talking about? The choke point between Maastricht and the rough terrain of the Ardennes was a major strategic factor that is completely missing from the game ... and was the principal reason for the attack on the Netherlands in the first place.

Here is a map. I also added a black line showing what 90 km look like on the map. 90 km is about the distance across an hex.
Also, I have submitted the question of this change to Harry, but the more I look at the map, the less I think we should make it. The hexgrid is simply too large to show that chunck of Dutch land between Belgium & Germany.

But the importance of the Dutch chunk lies in its political implications for Germany not in its width or length.

Regards

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 337

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 5:56:17 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

Yes, size doesn't matter ... otherwise, what is the justification for including Macau, or St Pierre & Miquelon?

Patrice, thanks for the map, but I was hoping you would find one extending into the Ardennes (say, up to the northern tip of Luxembourg). Applying your logic about 90km hexes, you will see from such a map that the maximum frontage across which Germany could attack Belgium without invading either the Netherlands or Luxembourg was only 60 km! Gulp!

Even adding a bit on for MWiF's non-existant Luxembourg, the length of Germany's border with Belgium/Luxembourg is only 140 km ... less than two hexes by your measurement!

The whole point of my argument is that the Belgium/German border is not just wrong, it is grossly wrong. At the moment there are four hexes where there should be one-and-a-half. My request that the border be shortened from four hexes to three is actually rather modest.

Between the wars, the German High Command was very concerned at the danger of again suffering the delays caused by Liege in 1914, when Germany respected the Netherlands' neutrality. Comparing the attacks of 1914 and 1940, you will see that in 1940 the right wing of the German advance went straight through Limburg, outflanking the Belgian defences completely. This was the reason for invading the Netherlands. (In my opinion they should not have, for in WWI a neutral Netherlands acted as a gateway past the British blockade, and in WWII would likewise have been more valuable to Germany as a friendly neutral in the mould of Sweden than an occupied nation).

Anyone taking up my request to submit a Belgian defence with Maastricht Dutch, to see if it really makes such a difference?

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 338

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 6:48:09 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Patrice, thanks for the map, but I was hoping you would find one extending into the Ardennes (say, up to the northern tip of Luxembourg).� Applying your logic about 90km hexes, you will see from�such a�map that the maximum frontage across which Germany could attack Belgium without invading either the Netherlands or Luxembourg�was only 60 km!� Gulp!

It is not "my" logic, it is the average calculated scale of a MWiF hex : 89 km. Around Lowlands the scale may be a bit different, 89 km is an overall average that I calculated.
Here is another map.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 339

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 8:20:26 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

The use of rail lines through neutrals is permitted for getting resources to factories. Spain provides a conduit for French North African resources through Gibraltar using only rail lines and the straits hex - no convoys required.

Germany does not need to use the Antwerp-Dusseldorf rail line for moving troops, since there are many alternatives once Belgium has fallen. And Belgium will have fallen is Antwerp has been taken and cleared of enemy ZOCs such that rail lines could be used.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 340

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 8:51:08 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The use of rail lines through neutrals is permitted for getting resources to factories. Spain provides a conduit for French North African resources through Gibraltar using only rail lines and the straits hex - no convoys required.

Whaaaat? There's no railway in Gibraltar, and in WWII the border with Spain was crossed only by pedestrians. No commercial traffic came through Gibraltar: it was purely a military base. Exports from North Africa would have gone from Ceuta to Algerciras.

See http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Gibraltar&ie=UTF8&ll=36.137741,-5.345374&spn=0.135861,0.319977&z=12

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 341

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 8:51:21 PM

Norman42

Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

But, in a game with no ZOCs on the impulse of invasion

In my experience, this option is never used. The few times we've tried it, it was fairly obvious the game isn't remotely balanced around this rule.

_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 342

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 8:59:28 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42

quote:

But, in a game with no ZOCs on the impulse of invasion

In my experience, this option is never used.� The few times we've tried it, it was fairly obvious the game isn't remotely balanced around this rule.

I agree wholeheartly. I would not recommend this option to anyone.

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 343

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 9:05:58 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The use of rail lines through neutrals is permitted for getting resources to factories. Spain provides a conduit for French North African resources through Gibraltar using only rail lines and the straits hex - no convoys required.

Whaaaat? There's no railway in Gibraltar, and in WWII the border with Spain was crossed only by pedestrians. No commercial traffic came through Gibraltar: it was purely a military base. Exports from North Africa would have gone from Ceuta to Algerciras.

See http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Gibraltar&ie=UTF8&ll=36.137741,-5.345374&spn=0.135861,0.319977&z=12

Marcus, the Gibraltar hex contains more than just Gibraltar. Algerciras for example is in that hex too.
But Gibraltar is the only thing named in this hex, so we use that names when it is about this hex.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 344

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 9:20:31 PM

Norman42

Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline

Here is the crux of the issue:

Yes, there is a slight inaccuracy on the map, due mostly to the courseness of the hexgrid. The small tongue of land in Limberg is not represented properly.

Fixing said hex by giving it *all* to Holland creates more problems then it fixes.

I'm serious when I say France is too strong in 1940. In my opinion it is even worse than the 'Russia too weak in 1941' problem. Competant play and average luck will see France usually last until very late 1940, and with 1 or 2 unlucky rolls on Germany's part can easily last til 1941. This is not uncommon.

Any change that makes Germany have to a) DoW more minors to get the same start position, or b) spend extra impulses trying to dig Brits out of Belgian hexes they normally could never get to in time is in my opinion bad. The difference between Brussels defended by a single Belgian unit, or defended by a double stacked BEF is huge. With the Limberg hex being Dutch, Germany can only get 1 hexside on Brussels in the first impulse(assuming cav set up in Liege and both inf in Brussels), as opposed to at least 2 as it currently stands. Germany is looking at a 2-1 attack at best, and if they dont kill both units, they are looking at a double stack of British in Brussels the next impulse. That alone will slow down the campaign at least a couple impulses at a time when it most hurts the Germans.

Or, it forces the Germans to attack Holland early in snow or mud. This limits strategic options for Germany and US entry would be hurt as well. The Germans in Amsterdam and Rotterdam also now have no air cover from British ground strikes, unless they were able to capture Limburg hex and rebase a fighter forward there.

Changing that hex would require adjusting the balance of forces on the Western Front. It is already imbalanced compared to historically, lets not try to make it worse.

_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 345

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 9:59:26 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42
I'm serious when I say France is too strong in 1940. In my opinion it is even worse than the 'Russia too weak in 1941' problem. Competant play and average luck will see France usually last until very late 1940, and with 1 or 2 unlucky rolls on Germany's part can easily last til 1941. This is not uncommon.

Shouldn't you then address that problem by letting France start with slighly fewer units or maybe weaker units?

When you look at the real map Patrice provided you see that the Belgian / German border is very narrow. It's very hard to blitz Belgium attacking from such narrow corridor. So Germany attacked the Netherlands as well.

I don't see a problem with Germany attacking the Netherlands a turn before attacking Belgium or an impulse before DoW'ing Belgium. If Germany can attack Belgium from the Netherlands then they can easily blitz most of Belgium and get their units to the French border befor the British can respond and send units deep into Belgium.

What really happened was that the French and British DID move into Belgium to defend against an advance there, but the Germans attacked through the Ardennes and crossed the Meuse near Sedan and trapped the Allied units who moved into Belgium. But this is very hard to accomplish because no Allied player will defend the Ardennes as poorly as they did in the real war. Most strategic wargames have this same problem. You defeat France by attrition rather than a blitz breakthrough who trapped a large portion of the Allied army. I remember all the times I played WIF5 and WIFFE I felt France was too strong and it was ahistorical that the Germans needed to attack with heavy losses to both sides. You gained territory by destroying the defenders and occupying the hexes. You didn't gain territory by mobile warfare surprising the Allies. WIF5 was even worse than WIFFE. I seem to remember that one reason for changing the WIFFE hex size was to have a broader front to attack in France. In WIF5 you only had a few front hexes outside the Maginot you could attack. So if you rolled some 1's as the Germans then you were in big trouble. In WIFFE you have more hexes to attack so it's a little bit better.

I've always felt this problem should have been addressed by doing something with the strength of the demoralized French army instead of changing the map in an ahistorical way so Germany had an easier task. We've tried with the MWIF map to make everything as accurate as possible and then it's strange we don't see if it's possible to rectify the obvious mistake of making the front line between Belgium and Germany too wide.

Can something be done to make the French less stronger? I seem to remember that it was particularly tough to get to Paris if you played with all the extra units as artillery, engineers etc. Then you had even more units you need to kill before you get a shot at Paris. But the problem is probably not the French units, but the strong British units you can send as an expeditionary force into France. What are the limit to the BEF deployment in France according to the rules?

Has this WIFFE balance issues been discussed with Harry? Something is not right if France regularly survives till late 1940. Then this is a sign you need to do something to make sure it's possible to capture Paris during the June/July turn.

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 346

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 10:07:26 PM

composer99

Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

First off, playing with "no ZoCs on surprise" is not very common, to my knowledge, in table-top WiF:FE. It is a game-breaking option that favours the Axis very heavily (set up a Barbarossa campaign with No Zocs on Surprise and you'll see what I mean). Further, I don't believe it is even being made available as an option in MWiF. At any rate, setting up a Belgian defence when there is no ZoCs on surprise is a futile gesture because there is no effective defence: the Germans can run into any empty Belgian city, envelop and crush the tiny Belgian army in its entirety without the slightest risk, and push up to the Franco-Belgian border.

On a general note, provided the Germans have good weather, decent rolls and their paratrooper corps, they can typically dismantle any Belgian defence on the surprise impulse, taking all three cities. Antwerp if defended is difficult to take unless the Germans are attacking from Rotterdam as well.

The default Belgian defence is to put one corps (usually the CAV) in Liege and two in Antwerp, leaving Brussels empty, almost without exception. There are three simple reasons:
- the unit in Liege protects Brussels from being seized thanks to its ZoCs. Liege is too easily seized no matter how many units you have with all the vectors for the Germans to attack from.
- the units in Antwerp can prevent the Germans from taking it if they do not attack Netherlands.
- Spreading the units out makes them easier to attack, and putting any in Brussels makes it possible for a regular overland attack to take place, guaranteeing the fall of Brussels during the surprise impulse.

All of the above assumes that the Germans are attacking Belgium with the present WiF:FE frontage. Note that if the Germans attack the Netherlands first, regardless of their frontage on Belgium, the Belgian response is pretty well as above since the Germans will be able to get to both clear hexes north of Liege.

If, on the other hand, the "Maastricht" hex becomes Dutch, the German frontage against Liege goes from a potential maximum 5 hexes at all times to a potential maximum of 3 unless they attack the Dutch in advance of or in conjunction with an attack on Belgium.

A simultaneous attack on the Netherlands and Belgium almost certainly means the CW gets to stuff either Antwerp or Rotterdam (or both if anything goes wrong) unless the Germans spend an o-chit on a supercombined. This is the case in WiF:FE as it stands, and the change of control of the "Maastricht" hex would not alter that as far as I can see. CW units in these hexes is bad news for the Germans.

If the Germans attack only Belgium and the Maastricht hex is Dutch, they cannot hope to seize Antwerp unless it is empty and they paradrop in, and they would have a maximum 1 hex on Brussels (+ maybe a paradrop). Therefore the Belgians' best response is probably to put the two infantry corps in Brussels and hope for the best and leave the cavalry in Liege to slow the Germans up.

However, at the end of the day, there are I think three compelling reasons for the "Maastricht" hex to remain German. They are related to the historical situation and how WiF varies from that:

First, the Allied armies facing Germany were very ill-led and badly organized, which is one of the reasons why France fell so quickly. Since Allied players cannot be expected to replicate the incompetency of their historical counterparts, any change in the map in this area that negatively affects Germany's flexibility and tactical situation (especially fighter cover as Norman42 notes) is a big edge for the Allies.

Second, the main German thrust historically was through the Ardennes, not through Flanders. This option does not exist in WiF: thanks to the ZoC mechanic the Germans cannot push to the western edge of the Ardennes and breakout into the open terrain of France: there will always be French troops in the way. By default the main German thrust must go through Flanders if they want to blitz their way through clear terrain. A Dutch-controlled Maastricht hex makes it harder for them to do this.

Third, as Norman42 states, the German campaign in the Low Countries and France takes a very long time to do properly, far longer than historical, and especially so if the Germans roll one or two bad land attacks or get bad weather during May/June. If they get fantastic weather, good turn ends and double impulses over the winter they can wrap things up early, but that is atypical. Typically France lasts through to August and even into September, and the Germans have had to attack the Dutch or the Belgians in March/April. Once again, a Dutch-controlled Maastricht hex adds to the time required for the Germans to polish off France, and all the more so if anything goes wrong.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 347

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 10:27:33 PM

Norman42

Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

Shouldn't you then address that problem by letting France start with slighly fewer units or maybe weaker units?

I've always felt this problem should have been addressed by doing something with the strength of the demoralized French army instead of changing the map in an ahistorical way so Germany had an easier task.

Absolutely. The trouble is, they have to go hand in hand. You can't fix one without the other for play balance reasons. As you said, the Western Campaign becomes a World War One style war of attrition and unit destruction...completely unlike the real campaign, and taking far longer to accomplish.

Fixing the map without fixing the overpowered 1940 French doesn't work. As well, reducing France's power while leaving a too-broad front to defend also doesn't work.

Truth be told, 90km per hex doesn't do justice to the fairly small Western Front. WiF has never done that campaign well. Belgium was what...4 hexes in WiF5? No room for manauever at all, just blunt force pummelling attacks til you reached and assaulted Paris. WiFFE helped somewhat with the enlarged scale, but still its not the battle of maneauver that it truely was; it's still mostly smashing through ring after ring of French til you reach Paris. The addition of artillery/anti-tank units only made the situation worse with now triple-stacked defences.

Oddly, the most successful Western Campaigns I've seen lately have been cordoning Poland and attacking France in 1939 (in conjunction with Italy) before they can build out their forcepool, transport their overseas forces home, and swamp the Germans in attrition warfare. It's very high risk, however. You either get lucky on your O-chit attacks and cap Paris in J/F 1940, or you lose the war.

_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 348

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 10:44:30 PM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

In many games of CWiF both defending and attacking France, it has usually fallen in May/Jun or July/August without the Germans O-chit usage. Oncein a while Frnace has lasted a turn or 2 longer but because of Germany going for Yugoslavia eraly on.

When the Germans use a both Poland and the West attacks in 39, France often falls in March 40.

I do not see the French as being too strong.

Lars

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 349

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 10:55:54 PM

cockney

Posts: 83
Joined: 11/15/2006
From: London
Status: offline

the way I see it, is that as well all know what the attacks happened where and when in history, without re-writing the rules or tinkering with the strength of units.

shouldn't the allied player man the franko-german border safe in the knowlage that holland and belgium are neutral.

as we know the french responded to late to stuff the belgium border so in a solitare game could/should this be an option?
in a pvp game the allied player will know the germans intention and be able to man the positons for the best defence so both players will have to think up cunning plans to dirvert attention to where the main thurst is going to take place.

i for one can't remember any opponent in a world conflict game attacking germany from france (as they did) when germany invades poland.
again could/should this be an ai option?

as politics in flames won't be in this product, but with luck in a future additon, perhaps in pvp bluffing your oppenent into beliving you won't attack would be the most practical method.

_____________________________

never piss off a sgt major

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 350

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 11:00:21 PM

Zorachus99

Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42

quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

Shouldn't you then address that problem by letting France start with slighly fewer units or maybe weaker units?

I've always felt this problem should have been addressed by doing something with the strength of the demoralized French army instead of changing the map in an ahistorical way so Germany had an easier task.

Absolutely. The trouble is, they have to go hand in hand. You can't fix one without the other for play balance reasons. As you said, the Western Campaign becomes a World War One style war of attrition and unit destruction...completely unlike the real campaign, and taking far longer to accomplish.

Fixing the map without fixing the overpowered 1940 French doesn't work. As well, reducing France's power while leaving a too-broad front to defend also doesn't work.

Truth be told, 90km per hex doesn't do justice to the fairly small Western Front. WiF has never done that campaign well. Belgium was what...4 hexes in WiF5? No room for manauever at all, just blunt force pummelling attacks til you reached and assaulted Paris. WiFFE helped somewhat with the enlarged scale, but still its not the battle of maneauver that it truely was; it's still mostly smashing through ring after ring of French til you reach Paris. The addition of artillery/anti-tank units only made the situation worse with now triple-stacked defences.

Oddly, the most successful Western Campaigns I've seen lately have been cordoning Poland and attacking France in 1939 (in conjunction with Italy) before they can build out their forcepool, transport their overseas forces home, and swamp the Germans in attrition warfare. It's very high risk, however. You either get lucky on your O-chit attacks and cap Paris in J/F 1940, or you lose the war.

I did something like this recently where I attacked netherlands on impulse 3, destroyed poland by end of turn, and attacked belgium in snow of Nov/Dec 39. With o-chit on a land action, I disrupted the french terribly in the beginning of jan/feb 40 in snow (unexpected by the french who had initiative). Snow turned to mud and the French couldn't respond quckly enough to the breakthroughs with so many movement 3 units. After failed bloody counter-attacks I pushed into Paris with a bit of luck.

Best I've personally done. If Jan/Feb didn't finish them, Mar/Apr would have.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 351

RE: Europe map? - 5/21/2008 11:38:33 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42
I'm serious when I say France is too strong in 1940. In my opinion it is even worse than the 'Russia too weak in 1941' problem. Competant play and average luck will see France usually last until very late 1940, and with 1 or 2 unlucky rolls on Germany's part can easily last til 1941. This is not uncommon.

This would be quite bizarre, because it rather would reflect German anticipation of the campaigns in France (hard) and Russia (walk in the park) than history.

quote:

Shouldn't you then address that problem by letting France start with slighly fewer units or maybe weaker units?

If France is really hard too crack for Germany in WIF, wouldn't it be better, instead of just correcting the map or instead of weakening French units, to give Germany an additonal O-Chit plus correcting the map?

Maybe there are four choices:
1. Leave everything as it is: this would not exactly fit to the historical-geographical realities (small defendable Belgian Border delaying Schlieffen-Plan in WW1, resulting in the too obvious "lesson" of a German DOW towards the Netherlands in WW2 for Schlieffen No.2. Exactly this worked in favour for the Manstein-Ardennes plan.)

2. Just change the map (making the hex Dutch) This might overpower the Wally defence in 1940

3. Change the map (making the hex Dutch) and weaken the French units This would reflect geo-strategical realities and German military superiority. But maybe it would destroy the delicate balance of WIF land unit strengths.

4. Change the map (making the hex Dutch) and add a German O-Chit. This would reflect geo-strategical realities and German military superiority without destroying the delicate balance of WIF land unit strengths. It would give Germany some sort of added strategic flexibility. A wildcard for creativity.

Regards

< Message edited by wosung -- 5/21/2008 11:40:00 PM >

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 352

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 1:14:53 AM

sajbalk

Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline

>>Patrice, the thinness of the Limburg salient is not a relevant factor. Cross neutral territory, however small, and it's >>war! (Consider Portugal and the tiny sizes of East Timor and Macau!) Therefore there has to be some sort of penalty >>for attacking Belgium through that hex.

Are you sure? I do not think Portugal was ever involved in the war with Japan. Wikipedia, I know, says Port stayed neutral and the Timorese co-operated with the Allies, but the Governor of Timor declared himself a prisoner to preserve neutrality.

IF Germany had crossed Southern Neth into Belgium, I doubt whether Neth. would have aligned herself with the Allies.

_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 353

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 1:46:17 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

Ok, let's stop with the discussion about the Belgium/Netherlands/German borders.

I appreciate all the comments, which seem well thought out and worthy of consideration. But there are clearly different viewpoints on this topic and we are unlikely to reached a consensus. It is not my purpose to provoke controversy, and this topic appears to foment controversy instantaneously.

So, I am going to leave this portion of the map as is and let all the blame/credit for its weaknesses/brilliance go to ADG.

Writing code is vastly more important to me - and to you, unless I am mistaken.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to sajbalk)

Post #: 354

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 1:53:34 AM

Norman42

Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

In many games of CWiF both defending and attacking France, it has usually fallen in May/Jun or July/August without the Germans O-chit usage.

If Germany attacks West at historical times (ie may/jun clear weather) are you saying Netherlands, Belgium, and France all fall in that same turn? I never, ever see a one turn conquest of France.

Or are you talking about a '39 DoW on Belgium and Netherlands followed by a winter/spring fight through J/F, M/A, M/J, J/A to conquer France? If so then thats much more believable. Attacking France in 39-early 40 meets less resistance. But again, this is neither historical, nor particularly good for US entry. It still is taking you 6-10 months to accomplish what was historically accomplished in under 2 months.

Having to start the campaign 2-3 turns (4-6months) early to be able to get France to fall "on time" isn't right, hence my statement that the West campaign is very biased against Germany in 1940.

Yes, France can fall in M/J 1940. No, it won't if the historical attack time is used. Ergo, France is stronger then it historically was.

Edit: Steve - Fair enough.

< Message edited by Norman42 -- 5/22/2008 1:54:52 AM >

_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 355

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 4:22:48 AM

Zorachus99

Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Ok, let's stop with the discussion about the Belgium/Netherlands/German borders.

I appreciate all the comments, which seem well thought out and worthy of consideration. But there are clearly different viewpoints on this topic and we are unlikely to reached a consensus. It is not my purpose to provoke controversy, and this topic appears to foment controversy instantaneously.

So, I am going to leave this portion of the map as is and let all the blame/credit for its weaknesses/brilliance go to ADG.

Writing code is vastly more important to me - and to you, unless I am mistaken.

Hurrah!

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 356

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 6:49:16 AM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

I think the Benelux map area was carefully studied, revised, compromised, and most importantly, playtested heavily, before the Final Edition map came out. There used to be a swamp in there, iirc. ?

The length of the French campaign is one of those areas where 1d10 CRT WiF is a totally different game from 2d10 CRT WiF. Sorry 'bout the acronyms. What would the Germans have to give up to get the French ARM reinforcement changed to something a little more real?

(in reply to Zorachus99)

Post #: 357

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 1:41:26 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

There have been some well argued points made here about Maastricht, but it really isn't a minor matter when one-and-a-half hexes are portrayed as four. A little bit of wiggle-room is fair because of the coarse hexgrid, but hex-inflation at that level (140km portrayed as 300+) is ludicrous.

My reading of the arguments is that it is normal practice to invade the Netherlands a little before invading Belgium, in which event who controls Maastricht initially has no adverse effect on play. Where it does count is when the Axis player chooses to leave the Netherlands alone. But this gives a significant (and, in my opinion, undesirable) 'surprise' advantage to Japan against the Netherlands East Indies, which we might view as the reward for accepting a harder time in Belgium.

In parallel with the debate about Maastricht, much has been written about the unrealistic strength of the French in 1940 with which I completely agree. This is a problem with very many games. Indeed the only game in which it is not a problem is Dunkirque 1940 which shrewdly starts after the breakthrough at Sedan has occurred and the Allies have finally woken up to what is going on.

Whatever solution is finally adopted, it has to be simple. I think Wosung's fourth suggestion in Post 352 is both simple and effective: give Maastricht to the Dutch but in compensation allocate Germany an extra O-Chit so that the historical blitzkrieg can actually happen.

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 358

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 10:03:00 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline

I agree with most of the comments made by Marcus, but I also realize we can NOT implement any changes in this area (give the Maastrict hex to the Netherlands and maybe give an O-chit to Germany to compensate) without Harry's consent. We can't let MWIF be different from WIFFE here.

So if anything will change here then it will be because Harry accepts that this needs to be addressed, maybe after a discussion among the die-hard WIFFE fans on the official WIF forum. Our job in this forum is to simply draw this "problem" to Harry's attention so it has a chance to be considered. Then we will await his reply. Patrice has already sent an email to Harry so I propose we just wait to hear what Harry says. If MWIF will change the map in the Netherlands then it will be because WIFFE will change and make an official errata about this.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 359

RE: Europe map? - 5/22/2008 10:25:37 PM

Mitchellvitch

Posts: 21
Joined: 2/29/2008
Status: offline

On the issue of a purportedly over-strong France: Picture the French player unfamiliar with the rules, more interested in whatever food and drink are on the go than in the game, slightly drunk, and very distracted. Then picture him (or her, although I've yet to meet a woman-WIFer) rolling nothing but ones and two. Except in air combat, when they clear the Stukas through every time.

Meanwhile, the German player is a dead-keen, highly experienced, extremely focussed WIF machine. And rolls nothing but nines and tens. Except when they need ones, when they get them.

That is how the historical result happens, and thank goodness, say I, that the game allows for the possibility, in fact probability, of a different result. Isn't that the point of a WW2 game?

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 360