Why not free production?

[Alexander Seil]

Well, the title sums it up. From what I understand, the production schedule is fixed. The question is, why?

[Crimguy]

A little order in a world of chaos? Just a stab . . .

[Josans]

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

Well, the title sums it up. From what I understand, the production schedule is fixed. The question is, why?

Right now we are looking for germans faced historically...scenarios and campaigns.

[Capt Cliff]

So your assuming the bombing campaign from the west goes historically? Fighters were pulled from the eastern front to defend the Reich. Adding more might help production a bit. If you can spare them.

[PyleDriver]

In addition to units manditorly pulled to the west, production %'s rise every year that go to the west also. So it rises from 15% in 41, to 50% in 45...

[Alexander Seil]

I meant - why not let the player change production priorities around, at least to some degree? I.e., more Panthers and less halftracks, or something along those lines. And while equipment flows could be restricted, why not let the player create units and have them fleshed out with whatever equipment the production lines spit out, instead of having them form exclusively from the historical OOB?

[benpark]

Here's my take on it (as an informed alpha tester rather than speaking for the developers)-

Think of this game as putting you in charge of STAVKA or OKH, with no possibility of replacement by the two crazies in charge. You put the forces in place and run the offensive and defensive plays, down to divisional levels (and some below). The game is (and I'll invent a phrase here) "massive-operational" rather than strategic. They (and other departments) run the economics.

I get the need to control all aspects of the war, but you are going to be stunned by the amount you can do each turn if you wish with deciding where to put sub-units within armies, corps and divisions and figuring out where you need to be allocating your scant resources to deal with the land mass you will be attacking and defending.

[mussey]

ORIGINAL: benpark

Here's my take on it (as an informed alpha tester rather than speaking for the developers)-

Think of this game as putting you in charge of STAVKA or OKH, with no possibility of replacement by the two crazies in charge. You put the forces in place and run the offensive and defensive plays, down to divisional levels (and some below). The game is (and I'll invent a phrase here) "massive-operational" rather than strategic. They (and other departments) run the economics.

I get the need to control all aspects of the war, but you are going to be stunned by the amount you can do each turn if you wish with deciding where to put sub-units within armies, corps and divisions and figuring out where you need to be allocating your scant resources to deal with the land mass you will be attacking and defending.

That makes good sense. I think its important from the onset of any wargame to understand the players proper role/command. As such, it then allows me to conduct proper operations.

[sol_invictus]

I am glad that we Players won't have complete contol over ever little aspect of the national means to fight the campaign. Leave the econ stuff to the national leaders and just let the player; the military leader; know what resources are available so that we can plan around that. We should be made to tailor our strategy around some imposed restraints that we most likely would wish were not present.

[sabre1]

I really did enjoy changing production in WIR, sigh...

Oh well...

It's not a deal breaker just something I really enjoyed. [8|]

[PyleDriver]

In WIR changing production became really gamey. The way this is set up it places more historical guidelines in the game...

[Capt Cliff]

It would be nice to be able to request production changes, like Panthers in 42 or ME262's in 43 or a long barrel 50mm on the PZIII's or what ever you dream up. Sure you get the single finger now and again but maybe you get King Tigers or JSI's in 43 or B-29's to bomb Berlin!

[itsjustme]

With all due respect, its concerns me greatly that there is no intention to allow players to change production.   If you want to play with historical production, there is no reason this can't be agreed to or simply include a "switch" to allow custom or historical production.  Pyledriver, while I can certainly understand that you may not want the additional micromanagement, others certainly will and do.  (see the fact that WITP is far and away matrix's most popular title).   Moreover, as with WIR, the game will rapidly deteriorate into a simply german punching bag towards the end of the war.  While certainly many players, including me, will relish the challenge of "doing something with nothing" against the Red Army in 44-45, I would also like the ability to play "what if" games by changing production, rather than having to delve into an editor.   Additionally, I find it very odd to have a Gary Grigsby game where production cannot be altered.  After all, logistics are an incredibly significant part of all of his games and logistics doesn't just mean supply movement.

[PyleDriver]

Well Ciff you have to work with what they had then...We kicked this around 8 months ago. It isn't going to change. I feel your pain...

[Capt Cliff]

ORIGINAL: itsjustme

With all due respect, its concerns me greatly that there is no intention to allow players to change production.   If you want to play with historical production, there is no reason this can't be agreed to or simply include a "switch" to allow custom or historical production.  Pyledriver, while I can certainly understand that you may not want the additional micromanagement, others certainly will and do.  (see the fact that WITP is far and away matrix's most popular title).   Moreover, as with WIR, the game will rapidly deteriorate into a simply german punching bag towards the end of the war.  While certainly many players, including me, will relish the challenge of "doing something with nothing" against the Red Army in 44-45, I would also like the ability to play "what if" games by changing production, rather than having to delve into an editor.   Additionally, I find it very odd to have a Gary Grigsby game where production cannot be altered.  After all, logistics are an incredibly significant part of all of his games and logistics doesn't just mean supply movement.

I think they are trying to simulate that you fight the war with what they give you and make do. But my point was you can always ask Santa! [:D]

Have a game where you get JSI's in 43 vs. the one you just finished where you didn't does add some replayability. I think being able to play the game over and over cause something changes is a good idea.

[itsjustme]

Would love to hear from Gary or Joel on this.  Totally out of character for their games.    Odd to have one of Gary's best ever games (WIR) have something that the topic/scale revisted doesn't.  Just doesn't make any sense not to include it.

[PyleDriver]

itsjustme, tweaking supply has be a major focus on this game. Big time...In WIR I ruled the table, now supply comes in so hard to effect troops after 4 turns in this one.

[itsjustme]

Not talking about supply.  Talking about production.   Players across the board are going to want to be able to tweak production.   Take a look at the WITP boards.  Whole tomes are being devoted to just that subject.   Production increases replayability and Gary's games have always allowed you to play with production.  That's what I am saying doesn't make sense.   I have no issue with the supply models you are talking about.

[PyleDriver]

First of all, Gary is like the Wizard of OZ, only Joel can talk to him...Keep in mind that were thinking of a War in Europe game also...Don't judge this game unit you get it...Please...

[itsjustme]

Not judging it, ,simply saying that this doesn't make sense and its out of character for Gary's games.   The flip side is that I keep hearing, trust me there is almost too much to do already.   Horsepucky.   If you want to automate some areas of the game you are playing, fine, I just don't see the reason to force a simplified system on those who prefer as much micromanagement as possible.   If what you are telling me is that this game is to the European theater what UV was to WITP, then I get even a little more irritated.   UV, while a fine game, seemed an awful lot like a test run for WITP that I had to pay for.