War in the East Q&A

[Iñaki Harrizabalagatar]

ORIGINAL: jaw

ORIGINAL: Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


I imagine that besides range, armor has the advantage of mobility and, of course, armor. I mean, I imagine squads have an anti armor value independent of their anti infantry value, right? and armor units will have different armor levels.
I also imagine that, besides range, terrain will provide some defense bonus, depending on terrain.
Let´s imagine the combat between an infantry division and an armor division. At long range only artillery would play, but it would be largely ineffective over armor units. At medium range infantry could use their antitank guns against armor, but they are handicapped because they are not armored (so can be destroyed by artillery and medium range mortar fire) and because theyt are largely inmobile, against mobile armor. Finally, at close range, infantry could use many other antitank weapons, but again tanks, as well as their armor, have the defense of their mobility. Am I right in these assumptions for the game?

In general yes but here is how it actually works using your example of an armored division versus an infantry division. Each of these divisions is composed of a variety of combat arms (or what I like to call combat elements). The armored division has AFVs in addition to infantry, engineers, and a variety of crew served weapons. The infantry division is similar except for having little or no armor. All of these combat elements are equipped with actual weapons. For example, a typical tank has a main gun and one or more machine guns. These weapons are individually rated for range and effectiveness against armored and non-armored targets. A typical infantry squad would have 8 or more men and a corresponding number of small arms including rifles, sub-machine guns, probably a light machine gun, and grenades (actual composition depending on nationality and period of War).

Now assume the armored division attacks the infantry division. The first round of combat begins at a randomly determined range between 20,000 and 30,000 yards. Only indirect fire artillery capable of that range would fire in this first round. (I'm not certain but I believe combat is simultaneous.)

The second round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the first round. For matematically simplicity let's say the first round was at 20,000 yards so the second round would be at 5,000 yards. This range is still greater than any direct fire weapon in the game so again only indirect fire weapons would participate but now more weapons like heavy mortars would also get to fire.

The third round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the second round or 1,250 yards. At this range, depending on the terrain, some direct fire weapons would now also participate plus all indirect fire artillery in range. Terrain permitting, tanks with long enough range guns could engage both armored and non-armored targets.

The fourth round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the third round or 300 to 350 yards (range is measured in 50 yard increments). Terrain permitting, machine guns, rifles, anti-tank rifles, light mortars would join the fray.

The fifth round of combat would occur at 1/4 the range of the fourth round or 50 to 100 yards. If the range is 50 yards this is the final round of combat; if the range of the fifth round is greater than 50 yards there would be a sixth round. The 50 yard range is close combat were weapons like grenades and sub-machine guns come into play.

After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

One Thing I recall I didn´t like about TOAW is that, for instance, an AA 88mm had exactly the same statistics that one mounted in a Tiger, while it is clear that a gun mounted on a tank has the big advantage of mobility, being able to reposition in no time, is that factored in this game? I

[Reichenberg]

ORIGINAL: jaw
After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Maybe it is my and my bad english - I am not native - but your last sentence is not fully clear to me. Do you mean:

After finishing all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Or do you mean:

After each round of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

The difference for me is e.g. (extreme and unrealisitc example) your armored division attacks an infantry division equipped only with submachine guns and grenades. This infantry division would have a hard time making it thru all the indirect and direct fire from longer ranged weapons and reach the 50 yards combat distance to use their sub machine guns and grenades. How will the game engine handle such a situation??

Uwe

[jaw]

One Thing I recall I didn´t like about TOAW is that, for instance, an AA 88mm had exactly the same statistics that one mounted in a Tiger, while it is clear that a gun mounted on a tank has the big advantage of mobility, being able to reposition in no time, is that factored in this game? I

There are multiple versions of the 88mm gun in the game with different stats.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Reichenberg

ORIGINAL: jaw
After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Maybe it is my and my bad english - I am not native - but your last sentence is not fully clear to me. Do you mean:

After finishing all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Or do you mean:

After each round of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

The difference for me is e.g. (extreme and unrealisitc example) your armored division attacks an infantry division equipped only with submachine guns and grenades. This infantry division would have a hard time making it thru all the indirect and direct fire from longer ranged weapons and reach the 50 yards combat distance to use their sub machine guns and grenades. How will the game engine handle such a situation??

Uwe

Sorry, I should have said "after all these rounds of combat the effect of accumulated damage is assessed and the defending unit will hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse".

Yes, even if a unit was equipped with only submachine guns and grenades (none are) it would still get to fight in the last round of combat providing anyone was still alive to fight.

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: jaw

ORIGINAL: Reichenberg

ORIGINAL: jaw
After all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Maybe it is my and my bad english - I am not native - but your last sentence is not fully clear to me. Do you mean:

After finishing all these rounds of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

Or do you mean:

After each round of combat effect of damage is accessed and the defending unit will either hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse.

The difference for me is e.g. (extreme and unrealisitc example) your armored division attacks an infantry division equipped only with submachine guns and grenades. This infantry division would have a hard time making it thru all the indirect and direct fire from longer ranged weapons and reach the 50 yards combat distance to use their sub machine guns and grenades. How will the game engine handle such a situation??

Uwe

Sorry, I should have said "after all these rounds of combat the effect of accumulated damage is assessed and the defending unit will hold its ground or be forced to retreat or worse".

Yes, even if a unit was equipped with only submachine guns and grenades (none are) it would still get to fight in the last round of combat providing anyone was still alive to fight.

Not just alive, but undisrupted. Elements take disruption as the battle wears on and at some point they are no longer fighting back (or at least not fighting back very well).

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: jaw

One Thing I recall I didn´t like about TOAW is that, for instance, an AA 88mm had exactly the same statistics that one mounted in a Tiger, while it is clear that a gun mounted on a tank has the big advantage of mobility, being able to reposition in no time, is that factored in this game? I

There are multiple versions of the 88mm gun in the game with different stats.

I would bet the type of unit comes into play, not just the weapon stat. I don't know this for a fact, but knowing Gary, I would bet it's accounted for in the formulas.

[Shupov]

Unlike WiR, will weather affect railroads (and roads)? Extreme cold affected German locomotives, and mud also caused problems.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Shupov

Unlike WiR, will weather affect railroads (and roads)? Extreme cold affected German locomotives, and mud also caused problems.

There is no direct effect of weather on railroads in terms of a movement penalty but rail movement is based on the unit's available movement points and that allowance is effected by supply which is reduced by weather. There are no roads in the game.

[wwiiogre]

Hi All,

How do I become a playtester for this incredible game?

Just kidding.

Hi everyone, I am Chris and I hope to be able to enjoy this game as much as I have enjoyed all of the other great games I have played over the years from these great people.

Steel Panthers, still on my hard drive.

Chris

[canuckgamer]

Don't know if this has been asked but when playing this game by PBEM can you view a replay of your opponent's move? If yes, besides being able to see the moves of the other player's visible units (I am assuming there is fog of war), will you also be able to view the results of his attacks? Thanks.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: McHugh

Don't know if this has been asked but when playing this game by PBEM can you view a replay of your opponent's move? If yes, besides being able to see the moves of the other player's visible units (I am assuming there is fog of war), will you also be able to view the results of his attacks? Thanks.

A replay feature has not currently been implemented (don't know if there will be one) but you can review the enemy's air missions and ground combat results. Fog of War is a game preference you can turn on or off.

[Shupov]

ORIGINAL: jaw

ORIGINAL: McHugh

Don't know if this has been asked but when playing this game by PBEM can you view a replay of your opponent's move? If yes, besides being able to see the moves of the other player's visible units (I am assuming there is fog of war), will you also be able to view the results of his attacks? Thanks.

A replay feature has not currently been implemented (don't know if there will be one) but you can review the enemy's air missions and ground combat results. Fog of War is a game preference you can turn on or off.

Hopefully the combat reports are more detailed than WiR. In WiR PBEM the defender sees less information than the attacker. For example the attacker sees aircraft and armor types whereas the defender only sees total numbers of each. The attacker also sees combat odds and the defender doesn't. This creates a bit of unbalance especially during time periods when one side is doing the majority of the attacking.

[Hard Sarge]

I not been in a PBEM game yet (I am not really set up to do those kinds of tests)

but, the defender, does have a nice system, to see what happened, on map

also, we got some nice fancy Admin stuff (Pav is a master at giving us what we ask for, in ways we can use) where you can see the a lot of info on what is going on

don't want to say too much about this, will be better when we can show it, then try to explain it

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
Not just alive, but undisrupted. Elements take disruption as the battle wears on and at some point they are no longer fighting back (or at least not fighting back very well).

Perhaps I will be alone on this, but I actually used to review carefully the battle description in TOAW - where it detailed how the battle had evolved. I found it helpful to understand - sometimes - combat results.

I would love to see in this very very very promising game a really informative combat report, not too detailed and not too concise.

[freeboy]

I presume this is a igougo? mot wego?

[Hard Sarge]

yes, you can move, fight your battles, and then move if you can (or others can) then the same for the other side

[Zovs]

Questions:

1. Will all the normal campaign starting positions be available?
(i.e. 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944, perhaps even the Jan 45 Soviet offensive to end the war on Berlin)

2. Besides the Typhoon scenario will other scenarios be implemented?
(Stalingrad, Kursk, Korsun, Sevastopol, Kharkov Budapest, to name a few)

3. How do the game mechancis basically work? (i.e., are their turn phases (aka traditional board war games, move/combat/exploit) or is it a free flowing turn system (aka TOAW) are combats resolved at the end of your player turn or are they fought during the turn, are orders issued and when your turn is done they are executed?)

Looking forward to this game.
[/align]

[Zovs]

Follow up Questions

4. Are Soviet Guards Divisions/Corps/Armies available and if so how do they effect the game (thinking late war here)

5.  Are German Korps Abtuilungs available and if so how can they be created?

6. Besides German SS divisions will their also be the SS Corps HQ assets available?

7. Have the play testers made to 1943 and beyond yet? I am more interested in the middle to late war when the Soviets have a better chance and crushing and killing German units.

8. How is the Command and Control (C3) aspect handled? For example during the early part of the war (41-42) Hitler stayed out of the OKH business for the most part (until the no retreat orders came about) and Stalin's meddling in 1941-42 cost him units and Generals. As the war in the east progress the axis shifted to the Germans being completely controlled by Hitler continuing interference and confusing orders and the Germans strict obedience to follow orders (sans individualism like Mainstein, Gudieran and Hoffman, until their dismissal or death) while at the other end as the war progress Stalin would listen and let his General Staff conduct the war and operational planning. So the long and the short should be in the early part of the war the Germans should run rough shod over the Russians but as the Russians gain more experience (by about 1943) they begin to not only hold their own, but ultimately defeat the Nazi invaders.

One of the most fustrating aspects of war games (both board and PC) displayed on the eastern front is this lack of command and control and doctrinal shift of the Germans beginning mastering of doctrine and operations overtaken and then superseded by the Soviets doctrine and ultimatly the Soviet victory over Germany.
[/align]

[Silvanski]

It may have been asked before, sorry for that...
Are unit and terrain graphics user-moddable?

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: dlazov66

Questions:

1. Will all the normal campaign starting positions be available?
(i.e. 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944, perhaps even the Jan 45 Soviet offensive to end the war on Berlin)

2. Besides the Typhoon scenario will other scenarios be implemented?
(Stalingrad, Kursk, Korsun, Sevastopol, Kharkov Budapest, to name a few)

3. How do the game mechancis basically work? (i.e., are their turn phases (aka traditional board war games, move/combat/exploit) or is it a free flowing turn system (aka TOAW) are combats resolved at the end of your player turn or are they fought during the turn, are orders issued and when your turn is done they are executed?)

Looking forward to this game.
[/align]

1. Yes, scenarios begin with the units deployed historically.

2. Yes, there will be smaller scenarios in addition to campaign games beginning at historically significant dates. The exact number of scenarios to be included has yet to be determined.

3. The basic game mechanics are that everything ground units do is based on movement points. It takes movement points to attack as well as to move but individual units can attack more than once provided they have sufficient movement points to do so. The turn structure is IGOUGO but as the non-moving player you can have units set to reserve which can possibly allow them to add their strength to units under attack. There is NO plotting of moves (i.e. orders).