Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Searry

I think it's absurd to think a game could be "realistic" in any way. The mountain divisions in the balkans are an obvious waste, just like Hitler pouring all his reinforcements in Tunisia when they couldn't even be supplied so the Luftwaffe transport force had to kill itself.

What sort of a gamer wants to make a choice where they kill half of their air transport fleet and still get the Italian-German African Army to surrender?

Doesn't make any sense to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBlizzard

In WITE2 there will be something to prevent the whermacht to enrole 2 millions of hiwis in the first year?
I remind my compaigns always ending with Heer stronger at the end of first harsh winter because of tons of Hiwis added without decreasing the experience of german units, as probably should be.
Thanks

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBlizzard

In WITE2 there will be something to prevent the whermacht to enrole 2 millions of hiwis in the first year?
I remind my compaigns always ending with Heer stronger at the end of first harsh winter because of tons of Hiwis added without decreasing the experience of german units, as probably should be.
Thanks

Hiwis did not have combat roles so I do not see why that should affect the experience of a division.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HaHaeTs

will the soviets have the same "fortress" feature for, say, Leningrad or Sevastopol?

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

Will leader rolls be changed so that players have an incentive to actually place better leaders in say Army HQs (For Germans) and Front HQs (for the Soviets)? The way rolls work right now, it is counterproductive to place Manstein anywhere higher than a Panzer Corps HQ.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBlizzard

In WITE2 there will be something to prevent the whermacht to enrole 2 millions of hiwis in the first year?
I remind my compaigns always ending with Heer stronger at the end of first harsh winter because of tons of Hiwis added without decreasing the experience of german units, as probably should be.
Thanks

Hiwis did not have combat roles so I do not see why that should affect the experience of a division.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

Will leader rolls be changed so that players have an incentive to actually place better leaders in say Army HQs (For Germans) and Front HQs (for the Soviets)? The way rolls work right now, it is counterproductive to place Manstein anywhere higher than a Panzer Corps HQ.

+1!!!!

Another thing is to reverse the application of distance penalties to leader rolls so the immediate HQ (Corps/Army) has to be closer than the higher HQ.

quote:

ORIGINAL: nukkxx

Hi, can't read the whole thread... too many pages.
So will just indicate a few things that I'd like to see in WITE 2.

* More clear/important impact of terrain on combat, per type of units. I'd love if a stronghold in the montain with a few companies in it to be hard to take even by large/strong units. Something as strong as the swamp effect on tanks in WITE1 which is the only case I find really convincing. In fact. I'd like something similar to TOAW.

* better impact of structures (bridges, lack of bridge, cities, villages, forts, etc) on movemnent/combat

* More orders like fortify, entrench and other engeneering works.
* More shortkeys like "next HQ". Generally speaking an improved system to better see units away from HQ.
* on-map arty able to fight at long range (several hexes) ! (like in TOAW in fact)
* better model for air bombing. Don't know if I'm doing something wrong but bombing an unit rarely has any effect ... (unlike bombing an airfield which has effect).
* naval warfare in the black sea
* improved bombing on production sites (I barely see any effect ... maybe my wrong doing ?)
* impact of the western front

Will probably have other wishes ... but so far, that's it :-)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

Will leader rolls be changed so that players have an incentive to actually place better leaders in say Army HQs (For Germans) and Front HQs (for the Soviets)? The way rolls work right now, it is counterproductive to place Manstein anywhere higher than a Panzer Corps HQ.

+1!!!!

Another thing is to reverse the application of distance penalties to leader rolls so the immediate HQ (Corps/Army) has to be closer than the higher HQ.

I haven't played WitE in a very long time so I have no idea about any changes since the code split from WitW. As far as I recall WitE2 has no changes from WitW but don't quote me on it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: martinsmit

will there be a lot of individual battalions and regiments in the game wite2 like witw?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

And because of this fact, most players realize quickly that there is no point in putting good generals in those higher HQ's (because they will almost always suffer from range penalties that negate the leaders' abilities). So Manstein and Model and Rokossovsky and Zhukov and Konev, and anybody else you've ever heard of, will stay at the Army/Corps command level and never get promoted. The only reason you'll have anybody good at the Front/Army/Group level is if they have a good morale level (which is not affected by range penalties - for reasons not clear to me).

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

And even if they have good morale, generally Russian Front and German Army HQ's get overloaded and with the penalty for too many CU's in your HQ, those high morale levels don't have any effect either. Worst thing is to have Zhukov in command of a front that has 125 CU over a capacity of 72. You're wasting him as a potential army commander (Front commanders can't be demoted to Army command) and you're wasting him as a front commander since the overload reduces his effective morale to about 2.

quote:

but Soviet Tank Brigades are now off map

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

And even if they have good morale, generally Russian Front and German Army HQ's get overloaded and with the penalty for too many CU's in your HQ, those high morale levels don't have any effect either. Worst thing is to have Zhukov in command of a front that has 125 CU over a capacity of 72. You're wasting him as a potential army commander (Front commanders can't be demoted to Army command) and you're wasting him as a front commander since the overload reduces his effective morale to about 2.

Actually this point on morale is incorrect. I actually believed this and the manual says that. But KenchiSulla actually tested it and found out that morale is not affected by CU overload either. This was astonishing to me when I found that out. But strictly speaking the manual should say morale is neither affected by CU overload or by distance either.

You can do your own partial test by reassigning units and seeing the effect it has to morale percentage in supply details - it does not change!

quote:

ORIGINAL: martinsmit

quote:

but Soviet Tank Brigades are now off map

How to form corps from the Soviet tank brigades?