My biggest issues with the game at the moment

[Wild]

delete

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Wild

ORIGINAL: Kamil

I apologise, but it is not that convincing for me - I still believe that German 2nd and 3rd level of command in '42 is too poor. But since so many people are disagreeing I can only accept my intellectual shortcomings [;)]

Your not wrong Kamil,but i'm afraid that the russian fanboys have won the day. Very few axis players will respond now as it's an exercise in futility.

As long as you have guys like Aurelian you will never have an impartial forum to actually improve the game. Sad but true.

Yet another useless post. Want some cheese with your whine?

Oh, my dear boy, I know how upset you get when you don't like what you read, but I'll post it anyway.

I have nothing to do what-so-ever with the design or development of WiTE. Sorry to burst one of your pet beliefs. Actually, not really.

Shame that it escapes your "attention" that the majority of the whining is from Axis fanboys. Such as you.

So much for your "impartiality".

[Flaviusx]

I actually would be fine with giving the Axis the ability to build corps and armies, btw. They need more AP sinks.

I also don't think this would make much difference in practice. Axis command capacity problems are marginal and fleeting. They can be managed even with existing assets. But if you want to buy more HQs, knock yourselves out.

Either way, Axis C&C is hugely better and far more reliable than Soviet C&C. The Soviet command structure is merely simpler, not better, and by simpler I mean: it's really a 1 level structure for most of the war. You do not want this kind of simplicity, folks. You also don't want the Soviet leaders, who are rather bad on average and unable to get much better due to in game caps. For the Germans, 7 points leaders are a dime a dozen, the Soviet only has a bare handful of these and no ability to increase their numbers.

[Tentpeg]

Kamil;

I think your arguement is a good one. BTW, I have always wondered why the Axis command capacity increased during the war instead of diminishing. OTOH,the quality of leadership is a non arguement. The effect the quality of leadership has on command capacity was graphed out in a very sterile controlled environment.

Wild;

It is amazing how someone can make a simple observation and be pounced upon. I have noticed the number of posts from "pro" axis players have significantly dropped over the last six weeks. Do not lose heart.

Flaviusx;

The voice of sanity and reason. I endorse the idea of being able to create the Corps/Army and Army Group HQ for the Axis. Imagine the manpower drain.

[Kel]

As improbable as its realization may seem when one consider the design choices that were and are being made, I have the impression that the decision to give the Axis side some ability to build SUs and HQs for a serious AP cost would be welcomed by most gamers, whatever the side they personally prefer.


 

[Wild]

delete

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg



Wild;

It is amazing how someone can make a simple observation and be pounced upon. I have noticed the number of posts from "pro" axis players have significantly dropped over the last six weeks. Do not lose heart.

It can. Especially when the above gets upset and goes on a rant on being told that what he claims needs to be fixed isn't broken.

The pro Axis players are more than likely spending the time playing the game.

For example: tm.asp?m=2999622&mpage=1&key=

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg



Wild;

It is amazing how someone can make a simple observation and be pounced upon. I have noticed the number of posts from "pro" axis players have significantly dropped over the last six weeks. Do not lose heart.

It can. Especially when the above gets upset on being told that what he claims needs to be fixed isn't broken.

And it's quite possible, if a bit tiresome, to run through the numbers to demonstrate by example the extreme difference in expected values of the die-roll results between the typical German C&C loop (corps, army, army group, OKH) and the typical Russian loop (army, front, STAVKA) all with typical loads. The results are lopsided enough to satisfy the most extreme GFB who bothers to run the numbers and who has a basic (minimal poker skills or perhaps high school level math [:)]) understanding of probability theory.

And for the record, I really am a GFB [:D]

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: pompack

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg



Wild;

It is amazing how someone can make a simple observation and be pounced upon. I have noticed the number of posts from "pro" axis players have significantly dropped over the last six weeks. Do not lose heart.

It can. Especially when the above gets upset on being told that what he claims needs to be fixed isn't broken.

And it's quite possible, if a bit tiresome, to run through the numbers to demonstrate by example the extreme difference in expected values of the die-roll results between the typical German C&C loop (corps, army, army group, OKH) and the typical Russian loop (army, front, STAVKA) all with typical loads. The results are lopsided enough to satisfy the most extreme GFB who bothers to run the numbers and who has a basic (minimal poker skills or perhaps high school level math [:)]) understanding of probability theory.

And for the record, I really am a GFB [:D]

[:D]

I'll let you in on a little secret. I always preferred playing the Axis. Russian Campaign, Russian Front, SPI's WiTE, War in Russia and it's predecessor. Whatever. Sight unseen, I wanted to play Russia with this one. Playing defense was never my cup of tea, but I thought of giving it a try.

[Q-Ball]

German C and C is a problem, but a manageable one. Here are some ways you can manage it:

1. Convert one of the Panzer Army HQs to an Infantry Army: You Don't need 4 Panzer Army HQs in 1942. You need more HQs for Infantry. You also have an excess of Panzer Corps command capacity, but I fill that with Infantry to go with Panzers.

2. Finnish Army: Finns only have 3 Corps HQs, but north of the no-move line is typically a very quiet sector anyway. Use Finnish Army commands for German units north of that line, and a couple hexes south as well. Finns have excess capacity at Army HQ level, especially if you rotate units back to Finland (which you should be doing). Plus, Finnish leaders are very good.

3. Axis Allies: Romanians and Hungarians can defend chunks of line, with a little help. Give them a few lower-end German divisions to help out. Hungarians and Romanians have plenty of excess HQ capacity.

4. Move all Romanian units OUT of German command structures

By these expedients, you should be able to move 12-ish German divisions to Axis Allied structure, and fill a Panzer Army with Infantry.

At that point, your 1942 army should be under command limits in almost all HQs

[parusski]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

German C and C is a problem, but a manageable one. Here are some ways you can manage it:

1. Convert one of the Panzer Army HQs to an Infantry Army: You Don't need 4 Panzer Army HQs in 1942. You need more HQs for Infantry. You also have an excess of Panzer Corps command capacity, but I fill that with Infantry to go with Panzers.

2. Finnish Army: Finns only have 3 Corps HQs, but north of the no-move line is typically a very quiet sector anyway. Use Finnish Army commands for German units north of that line, and a couple hexes south as well. Finns have excess capacity at Army HQ level, especially if you rotate units back to Finland (which you should be doing). Plus, Finnish leaders are very good.

3. Axis Allies: Romanians and Hungarians can defend chunks of line, with a little help. Give them a few lower-end German divisions to help out. Hungarians and Romanians have plenty of excess HQ capacity.

4. Move all Romanian units OUT of German command structures

By these expedients, you should be able to move 12-ish German divisions to Axis Allied structure, and fill a Panzer Army with Infantry.

At that point, your 1942 army should be under command limits in almost all HQs

That is helpful Q-Ball, thanks.

[RCHarmon]

The C&C in this game works as designed.  The design is bad.  If the Soviets are the worse off, that doesn't matter to me.  The Soviet C&C is bad to. This is just another example of bad game design that runs throughout this game.  Again, what we have is structuring and planning and movements that can not be reconciled to the realities that were found on the eastern front.

What this is is a game and a game only.  Only superficially does this reflect war on the eastern front. 

[Tentpeg]

One of the reasons I keep coming back to this forum is to gain insight provided by others. Q-Ball; I (and I suspect manay others) used several of the C&C capaciity work arounds you pointed out. But (and I feel a bit foolish) I never considered using Panzer HQ's for anything but Panzer and Panzer Grenadier. Sometimes the most obvious solution is the one you miss. Thank you.

[Farfarer61]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

German C and C is a problem, but a manageable one. Here are some ways you can manage it:

1. Convert one of the Panzer Army HQs to an Infantry Army: You Don't need 4 Panzer Army HQs in 1942. You need more HQs for Infantry. You also have an excess of Panzer Corps command capacity, but I fill that with Infantry to go with Panzers.

2. Finnish Army: Finns only have 3 Corps HQs, but north of the no-move line is typically a very quiet sector anyway. Use Finnish Army commands for German units north of that line, and a couple hexes south as well. Finns have excess capacity at Army HQ level, especially if you rotate units back to Finland (which you should be doing). Plus, Finnish leaders are very good.

3. Axis Allies: Romanians and Hungarians can defend chunks of line, with a little help. Give them a few lower-end German divisions to help out. Hungarians and Romanians have plenty of excess HQ capacity.

4. Move all Romanian units OUT of German command structures

By these expedients, you should be able to move 12-ish German divisions to Axis Allied structure, and fill a Panzer Army with Infantry.

At that point, your 1942 army should be under command limits in almost all HQs

Do you have access to my Axis games ?

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg

One of the reasons I keep coming back to this forum is to gain insight provided by others. Q-Ball; I (and I suspect manay others) used several of the C&C capaciity work arounds you pointed out. But (and I feel a bit foolish) I never considered using Panzer HQ's for anything but Panzer and Panzer Grenadier. Sometimes the most obvious solution is the one you miss. Thank you.

It gets even stranger. I'll be soon advocating non tank tank armies.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg

One of the reasons I keep coming back to this forum is to gain insight provided by others. Q-Ball; I (and I suspect manay others) used several of the C&C capaciity work arounds you pointed out. But (and I feel a bit foolish) I never considered using Panzer HQ's for anything but Panzer and Panzer Grenadier. Sometimes the most obvious solution is the one you miss. Thank you.

It gets even stranger. I'll be soon advocating non tank tank armies.

No
Don't
Ask

It'll be revealed soon enough...[;)]

[Flaviusx]

I'm not telling, just showing a little garter here.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I'm not telling, just showing a little garter here.

You know, Flavio, you'd be a much better tease, if you'd just shave those damned, hairy legs of yours...[;)]